Showing 1–5 of 5 results for author: Latifian, M

The Distortion of Threshold Approval Matching

Authors: Mohamad Latifian, Alexandros A. Voudouris

Abstract: We study matching settings in which a set of agents have private utilities over a set of items. Each agent reports a partition of the items into approval sets of different threshold utility levels. Given this limited information on input, the goal is to compute an assignment of the items to the agents (subject to cardinality constraints depending on the application) that (approximately) maximizes… ▽ More We study matching settings in which a set of agents have private utilities over a set of items. Each agent reports a partition of the items into approval sets of different threshold utility levels. Given this limited information on input, the goal is to compute an assignment of the items to the agents (subject to cardinality constraints depending on the application) that (approximately) maximizes the social welfare (the total utility of the agents for their assigned items). We first consider the well-known, simple one-sided matching problem in which each of $n$ agents is to be assigned exactly one of $n$ items. We show that with $t$ threshold utility levels, the distortion of deterministic matching algorithms is $Θ(\sqrt[t]{n})$ while that of randomized algorithms is $Θ(\sqrt[t+1]{n})$. We then show that our distortion bounds extend to a more general setting in which there are multiple copies of the items, each agent can be assigned a number of items (even copies of the same one) up to a capacity, and the utility of an agent for an item depends on the number of its copies that the agent is given. △ Less

Submitted 18 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Best of Both Distortion Worlds

Authors: Vasilis Gkatzelis, Mohamad Latifian, Nisarg Shah

Abstract: We study the problem of designing voting rules that take as input the ordinal preferences of $n$ agents over a set of $m$ alternatives and output a single alternative, aiming to optimize the overall happiness of the agents. The input to the voting rule is each agent's ranking of the alternatives from most to least preferred, yet the agents have more refined (cardinal) preferences that capture the… ▽ More We study the problem of designing voting rules that take as input the ordinal preferences of $n$ agents over a set of $m$ alternatives and output a single alternative, aiming to optimize the overall happiness of the agents. The input to the voting rule is each agent's ranking of the alternatives from most to least preferred, yet the agents have more refined (cardinal) preferences that capture the intensity with which they prefer one alternative over another. To quantify the extent to which voting rules can optimize over the cardinal preferences given access only to the ordinal ones, prior work has used the distortion measure, i.e., the worst-case approximation ratio between a voting rule's performance and the best performance achievable given the cardinal preferences. The work on the distortion of voting rules has been largely divided into two worlds: utilitarian distortion and metric distortion. In the former, the cardinal preferences of the agents correspond to general utilities and the goal is to maximize a normalized social welfare. In the latter, the agents' cardinal preferences correspond to costs given by distances in an underlying metric space and the goal is to minimize the (unnormalized) social cost. Several deterministic and randomized voting rules have been proposed and evaluated for each of these worlds separately, gradually improving the achievable distortion bounds, but none of the known voting rules perform well in both worlds simultaneously. In this work, we prove that one can achieve the best of both worlds by designing new voting rules, that simultaneously achieve near-optimal distortion guarantees in both distortion worlds. We also prove that this positive result does not generalize to the case where the voting rule is provided with the rankings of only the top-$t$ alternatives of each agent, for $t<m$. △ Less

Submitted 30 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Comments: EC'23

Almost Envy-freeness, Envy-rank, and Nash Social Welfare Matchings

Authors: Alireza Farhadi, MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi, Mohamad Latifian, Masoud Seddighin, Hadi Yami

Abstract: Envy-free up to one good (EF1) and envy-free up to any good (EFX) are two well-known extensions of envy-freeness for the case of indivisible items. It is shown that EF1 can always be guaranteed for agents with subadditive valuations. In sharp contrast, it is unknown whether or not an EFX allocation always exists, even for four agents and additive valuations. In addition, the best approximation gua… ▽ More Envy-free up to one good (EF1) and envy-free up to any good (EFX) are two well-known extensions of envy-freeness for the case of indivisible items. It is shown that EF1 can always be guaranteed for agents with subadditive valuations. In sharp contrast, it is unknown whether or not an EFX allocation always exists, even for four agents and additive valuations. In addition, the best approximation guarantee for EFX is $(φ-1) \simeq 0.61$ by Amanitidis et al.. In order to find a middle ground to bridge this gap, in this paper we suggest another fairness criterion, namely envy-freeness up to a random good or EFR, which is weaker than EFX, yet stronger than EF1. For this notion, we provide a polynomial-time $0.73$-approximation allocation algorithm. For our algorithm, we introduce Nash Social Welfare Matching which makes a connection between Nash Social Welfare and envy freeness. We believe Nash Social Welfare Matching will find its applications in future work. △ Less

Submitted 14 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Resource-Aware Protocols for Network Cost-Sharing Games

Authors: George Christodoulou, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Mohamad Latifian, Alkmini Sgouritsa

Abstract: We study the extent to which decentralized cost-sharing protocols can achieve good price of anarchy (PoA) bounds in network cost-sharing games with $n$ agents. We focus on the model of resource-aware protocols, where the designer has prior access to the network structure and can also increase the total cost of an edge(overcharging), and we study classes of games with concave or convex cost functio… ▽ More We study the extent to which decentralized cost-sharing protocols can achieve good price of anarchy (PoA) bounds in network cost-sharing games with $n$ agents. We focus on the model of resource-aware protocols, where the designer has prior access to the network structure and can also increase the total cost of an edge(overcharging), and we study classes of games with concave or convex cost functions. We first consider concave cost functions and our main result is a cost-sharing protocol for symmetric games on directed acyclic graphs that achieves a PoA of $2+\varepsilon$ for some arbitrary small positive $\varepsilon$, which improves to $1+\varepsilon$ for games with at least two players. We also achieve a PoA of 1 for series-parallel graphs and show that no protocol can achieve a PoA better than $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ for multicast games. We then also consider convex cost functions and prove analogous results for series-parallel networks and multicast games, as well as a lower bound of $Ω(n)$ for the PoA on directed acyclic graphs without the use of overcharging. △ Less

Submitted 7 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Comments: Full version of a paper published at Economics and Computation (EC) 2020

MSC Class: 91A43; 91A11

On the Distortion Value of the Elections with Abstention

Authors: Mohammad Ghodsi, Mohamad Latifian, Masoud Seddighin

Abstract: In Spatial Voting Theory, distortion is a measure of how good the winner is. It is proved that no deterministic voting mechanism can guarantee a distortion better than $3$, even for simple metrics such as a line. In this study, we wish to answer the following question: how does the distortion value change if we allow less motivated agents to abstain from the election? We consider an election wit… ▽ More In Spatial Voting Theory, distortion is a measure of how good the winner is. It is proved that no deterministic voting mechanism can guarantee a distortion better than $3$, even for simple metrics such as a line. In this study, we wish to answer the following question: how does the distortion value change if we allow less motivated agents to abstain from the election? We consider an election with two candidates and suggest an abstention model, which is a more general form of the abstention model proposed by Kirchgassner. We define the concepts of the expected winner and the expected distortion to evaluate the distortion of an election in our model. Our results fully characterize the distortion value and provide a rather complete picture of the model. △ Less

Submitted 1 August, 2020; v1 submitted 24 December, 2018; originally announced December 2018.

Comments: Revised version of the paper appeared in AAAI-19