A celebrated impossibility result by Myerson and Satterthwaite (1983) shows that any truthful mechanism for two-sided markets that maximizes social welfare must run a deficit, resulting in a necessity to relax welfare efficiency and the use of approximation mechanisms. Such mechanisms in general make extensive use of the Bayesian priors. In this work, we investigate a question of increasing theoretical and practical importance: how much prior information is required to design mechanisms with near-optimal approximations?

We study long-term equilibria that arise in the token monetary policy, or tokenomics, design of proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchain systems that engage utility maximizing users and validators. Validators are system maintainers who get rewarded with tokens for performing the work necessary for the system to function properly, while users compete and pay with such tokens for getting a desired portion of the system service. We study how the system service provision and suitable rewards schemes together can lead to equilibria with the following desirable characteristics (1) viability: the system keeps parties engaged, (2) decentralization and skin-in-the-game: multiple sufficiently invested validators are participating, (3) stability: the price path of the underlying token used to transact with the system does not change widely over time, and (4) feasibility: the mechanism is easy to implement as a smart contract, e.g., it does not require a fiat reserve on-chain to perform token buybacks or to perform bookkeeping of exponentially growing token holdings. Our analysis enables us to put forward a novel generic mechanism for blockchain monetary policy that we call quantitative rewarding (QR). We investigate how to implement QR in single-token and two-token proof of stake (PoS) blockchain systems. The latter are systems that utilize one token for the users to pay the transaction fees and a different token for the validators to participate in the PoS protocol and get rewarded. Our approach demonstrates a concrete advantage of the two-token setting in terms of the ability of the QR mechanism to be realized effectively and provide good equilibria. Our analysis also reveals an inherent limitation of the single token setting in terms of implementing an effective blockchain monetary policy - a distinction that is, to the best of our knowledge, highlighted for the first time.licy - a distinction that is, to the best of our knowledge, highlighted for the first time.

Participatory budgeting allows citizens to decide how to allocate public funds among projects. Motivated by recent real-world applications in both municipal and blockchain environments, we propose and study a framework where voters can donate additional private funds to enhance their own satisfaction, using cumulative ballots to express preferences. We introduce the first mechanisms for this setting and evaluate them primarily based on the satisfaction of axioms, while also exploring their algorithmic and strategic aspects.

Handling congestion in blockchain systems is a fundamental problem given that the security and decentralization objectives of such systems lead to designs that compromise on (horizontal) scalability (what sometimes is referred to as the “blockchain trilemma”). Motivated by this, we focus on the question whether it is possible to design a transaction inclusion policy for block producers that facilitates fee and delay predictability while being incentive compatible at the same time. Reconciling these three properties is seemingly paradoxical given that the dominant approach to transaction processing is based on first-price auctions (e.g., as in Bitcoin) or dynamic adjustment of the minimum admissible fee (e.g. as in Ethereum EIP-1559) something that breaks fee predictability. At the same time, in fixed fee mechanisms (e.g., as in Cardano), fees are trivially predictable but are subject to relatively inexpensive bribing or denial of service attacks where transactions may be delayed indefinitely by a well funded attacker, hence breaking delay predictability. In this work, we set out to address this problem by putting forward blockchain space tokenization (BST), namely a new capability of a blockchain system to tokenize its capacity for transactions and allocate it to interested users who are willing to pay ahead of time for the ability to post transactions regularly for a period of time. We analyze our system in the face of worst-case transaction-processing attacks by introducing a security game played between the mempool mechanism and an adversary. Leveraging this framework, we prove that BST offers predictable and asymptotically optimal delays, predictable fees, and is incentive compatible, thus answering the question posed in the affirmative.

Fair allocation of indivisible goods has attracted extensive attention over the last two decades, yielding numerous elegant algorithmic results and producing challenging open questions. The problem becomes much harder in the presence of strategic agents. Ideally, one would want to design truthful mechanisms that produce allocations with fairness guarantees. However, in the standard setting without monetary transfers, it is generally impossible to have truthful mechanisms that provide non-trivial fairness guarantees. Recently, Amanatidis et al. [2021] suggested the study of mechanisms that produce fair allocations in their equilibria. Specifically, when the agents have additive valuation functions, the simple Round-Robin algorithm always has pure Nash equilibria and the corresponding allocations are envy-free up to one good (EF1) with respect to the agents' true valuation functions. Following this agenda, we show that this outstanding property of the Round-Robin mechanism extends much beyond the above default assumption of additivity. In particular, we prove that for agents with cancelable valuation functions (a natural class that contains, e.g., additive and budget-additive functions), this simple mechanism always has equilibria and even its approximate equilibria correspond to approximately EF1 allocations with respect to the agents' true valuation functions. Further, we show that the approximate EF1 fairness of approximate equilibria surprisingly holds for the important class of submodular valuation functions as well, even though exact equilibria fail to exist!

Abstract. We consider the problem of computing a (pure) Bayes–Nash equilibrium in the first-price auction with continuous value distributions and discrete bidding space. We prove that when bidders have independent subjective prior beliefs about the value distributions of the other bidders, computing an [Formula: see text]-equilibrium of the auction is PPAD-complete, and computing an exact equilibrium is FIXP-complete. We also provide an efficient algorithm for solving a special case of the problem for a fixed number of bidders and available bids.

Part of the design of many blockchains and cryptocurrencies includes a treasury, which periodically allocates collected funds to various projects that could be beneficial to their ecosystem. These projects are then voted on and selected by the users of the respective cryptocurrency. To better inform the users' choices, the proposals can be reviewed, in distributed fashion. Motivated by these intricacies, we study the problem of crowdsourcing reviews for different proposals, in parallel. During the reviewing phase, every reviewer can select the proposals to write reviews for, as well as the quality of each review. The quality levels follow certain very coarse community guidelines (since the review of the reviews has to be robust enough, even though it is also crowdsourced) and can have values such as 'excellent' or 'good'. Based on these scores and the distribution of reviews, every reviewer will receive some reward for their efforts. In this paper, we consider a simple and intuitive reward scheme and show that it always has pure Nash equilibria, under two different scenarios. In addition, we show that these equilibria guarantee constant factor approximations for two natural metrics: the total quality of all reviews, as well as the fraction of proposals that received at least one review, compared to the optimal outcome.

Blockchain systems come with a promise of decentralization that, more often than not, stumbles on a roadblock when key decisions about modifying the software codebase need to be made. In a setting where "code-is-law," modifying the code can be a controversial process, frustrating to system stakeholders, and, most crucially, highly disruptive for the underlying systems. This is attested by the fact that both of the two major cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin and Ethereum, have undergone "hard forks" that resulted in the creation of alternative systems which divided engineering teams, computational resources, and duplicated digital assets creating confusion for the wider community and opportunities for fraudulent activities. The above events, and numerous other similar ones, underscore the importance of Blockchain governance, namely the set of processes that blockchain platforms utilize in order to perform decision-making and converge to a widely accepted direction for the system to evolve. While a rich topic of study in other areas, including social choice theory and electronic voting for public office elections, governance of blockchain platforms is lacking a well established set of methods and practices that are adopted industry wide. Instead, different systems adopt approaches of a variable level of sophistication and degree of integration within the platform and its functionality. This makes the topic of blockchain governance a fertile domain for a thorough systematization that we undertake in this work.

We study single-sample prophet inequalities (SSPIs), i.e., prophet inequalities where only a single sample from each prior distribution is available. Besides a direct, and optimal, SSPI for the basic single choice problem [Rubinstein et al., 2020], most existing SSPI results were obtained via an elegant, but inherently lossy reduction to order-oblivious secretary (OOS) policies [Azar et al., 2014]. Motivated by this discrepancy, we develop an intuitive and versatile greedy-based technique that yields SSPIs directly rather than through the reduction to OOSs. Our results can be seen as generalizing and unifying a number of existing results in the area of prophet and secretary problems. Our algorithms significantly improve on the competitive guarantees for a number of interesting scenarios (including general matching with edge arrivals, bipartite matching with vertex arrivals, and certain matroids), and capture new settings (such as budget additive combinatorial auctions). Complementing our algorithmic results, we also consider mechanism design variants. Finally, we analyze the power and limitations of different SSPI approaches by providing a partial converse to the reduction from SSPI to OOS given by Azar et al.

Constrained submodular maximization problems encompass a wide variety of applications, including personalized recommendation, team formation, and revenue maximization via viral marketing. The massive instances occurring in modern-day applications can render existing algorithms prohibitively slow. Moreover, frequently those instances are also inherently stochastic. Focusing on these challenges, we revisit the classic problem of maximizing a (possibly non-monotone) submodular function subject to a knapsack constraint. We present a simple randomized greedy algorithm that achieves a 5.83-approximation and runs in O(n log n) time, i.e., at least a factor n faster than other state-of-the-art algorithms. The versatility of our approach allows us to further transfer it to a stochastic version of the problem. There, we obtain a (9 + ε)-approximation to the best adaptive policy, which is the first constant approximation for non-monotone objectives. Experimental evaluation of our algorithms showcases their improved performance on real and synthetic data.

The growing need to deal with massive instances motivates the design of algorithms balancing the quality of the solution with applicability. For the latter, an important measure is the \emph{adaptive complexity}, capturing the number of sequential rounds of parallel computation needed. In this work we obtain the first \emph{constant factor} approximation algorithm for non-monotone submodular maximization subject to a knapsack constraint with \emph{near-optimal} $O(\log n)$ adaptive complexity. Low adaptivity by itself, however, is not enough: one needs to account for the total number of function evaluations (or value queries) as well. Our algorithm asks $\tilde{O}(n^2)$ value queries, but can be modified to run with only $\tilde{O}(n)$ instead, while retaining a low adaptive complexity of $O(\log^2n)$. Besides the above improvement in adaptivity, this is also the first \emph{combinatorial} approach with sublinear adaptive complexity for the problem and yields algorithms comparable to the state-of-the-art even for the special cases of cardinality constraints or monotone objectives. Finally, we showcase our algorithms’ applicability on real-world datasets.

We consider the problem of computing a (pure) Bayes-Nash equilibrium in the first-price auction with continuous value distributions and discrete bidding space. We prove that when bidders have independent subjective prior beliefs about the value distributions of the other bidders, computing an $\varepsilon$-equilibrium of the auction is PPAD-complete, and computing an exact equilibrium is FIXP-complete.

A celebrated impossibility result by Myerson and Satterthwaite (1983) shows that any truthful mechanism for two-sided markets that maximizes social welfare must run a deficit, resulting in a necessity to relax welfare efficiency and the use of approximation mechanisms. Such mechanisms in general make extensive use of the Bayesian priors. In this work, we investigate a question of increasing theoretical and practical importance: how much prior information is required to design mechanisms with near-optimal approximations? Our first contribution is a more general impossibility result stating that no meaningful approximation is possible without any prior information, expanding the famous impossibility result of Myerson and Satterthwaite. Our second contribution is that one single sample (one number per item), arguably a minimum-possible amount of prior information, from each seller distribution is sufficient for a large class of two-sided markets. We prove matching upper and lower bounds on the best approximation that can be obtained with one single sample for subadditive buyers and additive sellers, regardless of computational considerations. Our third contribution is the design of computationally efficient blackbox reductions that turn any one-sided mechanism into a two-sided mechanism with a small loss in the approximation, while using only one single sample from each seller. On the way, our blackbox-type mechanisms deliver several interesting positive results in their own right, often beating even the state of the art that uses full prior information.

We study a variant of the k -server problem, the infinite server problem, in which infinitely many servers reside initially at a particular point of the metric space and serve a sequence of requests. In the framework of competitive analysis, we show a surprisingly tight connection between this problem and the resource augmentation version of the k -server problem, also known as the (h,k) -server problem, in which an online algorithm with k servers competes against an offline algorithm with h servers. Specifically, we show that the infinite server problem has bounded competitive ratio if and only if the (h,k) -server problem has bounded competitive ratio for some k = O ( h ). We give a lower bound of 3.146 for the competitive ratio of the infinite server problem, which holds even for the line and some simple weighted stars. It implies the same lower bound for the (h,k) -server problem on the line, even when k/h → ∞, improving on the previous known bounds of 2 for the line and 2.4 for general metrics. For weighted trees and layered graphs, we obtain upper bounds, although they depend on the depth. Of particular interest is the infinite server problem on the line, which we show to be equivalent to the seemingly easier case in which all requests are in a fixed bounded interval. This is a special case of a more general reduction from arbitrary metric spaces to bounded subspaces. Unfortunately, classical approaches (double coverage and generalizations, work function algorithm, balancing algorithms) fail even for this special case.

We study the K-Facility Reallocation problem on the real line, where we maintain K facility locations over T stages, based on the stage-dependent locations of n agents. Each agent is connected to the nearest facility at each stage, and the facilities may move from one stage to another, to accommodate different agent locations. The objective is to minimize the connection cost of the agents plus the total moving cost of the facilities, over all stages. The K-Facility Reallocation problem was introduced by de Keijzer and Wojtczak, where they mostly focused on the special case of a single facility. Using an LP-based approach, we present a polynomial time algorithm that computes the optimal solution for any number of facilities. We also consider the online K-Facility Reallocation problem, where the algorithm becomes aware of agent locations in a stage-by-stage fashion. By exploiting an interesting connection to the classical K-server problem, we present a constant-competitive algorithm for K=2 facilities.

Constrained submodular maximization problems encompass a wide variety of applications, including personalized recommendation, team formation, and revenue maximization via viral marketing. The massive instances occurring in modern-day applications can render existing algorithms prohibitively slow. Moreover, frequently those instances are also inherently stochastic. Focusing on these challenges, we revisit the classic problem of maximizing a (possibly non-monotone) submodular function subject to a knapsack constraint. We present a simple randomized greedy algorithm that achieves a $5.83$ approximation and runs in $O(n \log n)$ time, i.e., at least a factor $n$ faster than other state-of-the-art algorithms. The robustness of our approach allows us to further transfer it to a stochastic version of the problem. There, we obtain a 9-approximation to the best adaptive policy, which is the first constant approximation for non-monotone objectives. Experimental evaluation of our algorithms showcases their improved performance on real and synthetic data.

The Pandora's Box Problem, originally formalized by Weitzman in 1979, models selection from a set of options each with stochastic parameters, when evaluation (i.e. sampling) is costly. This includes, for example, the problem of hiring a skilled worker, where only one hire can be made, but the evaluation of each candidate is an expensive procedure.

We characterise the set of dominant strategy incentive compatible (DSIC), strongly budget balanced (SBB), and ex-post individually rational (IR) mechanisms for the multi-unit bilateral trade setting. In such a setting there is a single buyer and a single seller who holds a finite number k of identical items. The mechanism has to decide how many units of the item are transferred from the seller to the buyer and how much money is transferred from the buyer to the seller. We consider two classes of valuation functions for the buyer and seller: Valuations that are increasing in the number of units in possession, and the more specific class of valuations that are increasing and submodular.Furthermore, we present some approximation results about the performance of certain such mechanisms, in terms of social welfare: For increasing submodular valuation functions, we show the existence of a deterministic 2-approximation mechanism and a randomised e/(1 − e) approximation mechanism, matching the best known bounds for the single-item setting.

We study the trade-off between the Price of Anarchy (PoA) and the Price of Stability (PoS) in mechanism design, in the prototypical problem of unrelated machine scheduling. We give bounds on the space of feasible mechanisms with respect to the above metrics, and observe that two fundamental mechanisms, namely the First-Price (FP) and the Second-Price (SP), lie on the two opposite extrema of this boundary. Furthermore, for the natural class of anonymous task-independent mechanisms, we completely characterize the PoA/PoS Pareto frontier; we design a class of optimal mechanisms \(\mathcal {SP}_\alpha \) that lie exactly on this frontier. In particular, these mechanisms range smoothly, with respect to parameter \(\alpha \ge 1\) across the frontier, between the First-Price ( \(\mathcal {SP}_1\) ) and Second-Price ( \(\mathcal {SP}_\infty \) ) mechanisms. En route to these results, we also provide a definitive answer to an important question related to the scheduling problem, namely whether non-truthful mechanisms can provide better makespan guarantees in the equilibrium, compared to truthful ones. We answer this question in the negative, by proving that the Price of Anarchy of all scheduling mechanisms is at least n , where n is the number of machines.

We study the strategic implications that arise from adding one extra option to the miners participating in the bitcoin protocol. We propose that when adding a block, miners also have the ability to pay forward an amount to be collected by the first miner who successfully extends their branch, giving them the power to influence the incentives for mining. We formulate a stochastic game for the study of such incentives and show that with this added option, smaller miners can guarantee that the best response of even substantially more powerful miners is to follow the expected behavior intended by the protocol designer.

We study a dynamic market setting where an intermediary interacts with an unknown large sequence of agents that can be either sellers or buyers: their identities, as well as the sequence length n, are decided in an adversarial, online way. Each agent is interested in trading a single item, and all items in the market are identical. The intermediary has some prior, incomplete knowledge of the agents' values for the items: all seller values are independently drawn from the same distribution F_S, and all buyer values from F_B. The two distributions may differ, and we make common regularity assumptions, namely that F_B is MHR and F_S is log-concave. We focus on online, posted-price mechanisms, and analyse two objectives: that of maximizing the intermediary's profit and that of maximizing the social welfare, under a competitive analysis benchmark. First, on the negative side, for general agent sequences we prove tight competitive ratios of Theta(\sqrt(n)) and Theta(\ln n), respectively for the two objectives. On the other hand, under the extra assumption that the intermediary knows some bound \alpha on the ratio between the number of sellers and buyers, we design asymptotically optimal online mechanisms with competitive ratios of 1+o(1) and 4, respectively. Additionally, we study the model where the number of items that can be stored in stock throughout the execution is bounded, in which case the competitive ratio for the profit is improved to O(ln n).