Showing 1–22 of 22 results for author: Hartline, J D

Error-Tolerant E-Discovery Protocols

Authors: **shuo Dong, Jason D. Hartline, Liren Shan, Aravindan Vijayaraghavan

Abstract: We consider the multi-party classification problem introduced by Dong, Hartline, and Vijayaraghavan (2022) in the context of electronic discovery (e-discovery). Based on a request for production from the requesting party, the responding party is required to provide documents that are responsive to the request except for those that are legally privileged. Our goal is to find a protocol that verifie… ▽ More We consider the multi-party classification problem introduced by Dong, Hartline, and Vijayaraghavan (2022) in the context of electronic discovery (e-discovery). Based on a request for production from the requesting party, the responding party is required to provide documents that are responsive to the request except for those that are legally privileged. Our goal is to find a protocol that verifies that the responding party sends almost all responsive documents while minimizing the disclosure of non-responsive documents. We provide protocols in the challenging non-realizable setting, where the instance may not be perfectly separated by a linear classifier. We demonstrate empirically that our protocol successfully manages to find almost all relevant documents, while incurring only a small disclosure of non-responsive documents. We complement this with a theoretical analysis of our protocol in the single-dimensional setting, and other experiments on simulated data which suggest that the non-responsive disclosure incurred by our protocol may be unavoidable. △ Less

Submitted 31 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Comments: 28 pages, 6 figures, CSLAW 2024

Algorithmic Robust Forecast Aggregation

Authors: Yongkang Guo, Jason D. Hartline, Zhihuan Huang, Yuqing Kong, Anant Shah, Fang-Yi Yu

Abstract: Forecast aggregation combines the predictions of multiple forecasters to improve accuracy. However, the lack of knowledge about forecasters' information structure hinders optimal aggregation. Given a family of information structures, robust forecast aggregation aims to find the aggregator with minimal worst-case regret compared to the omniscient aggregator. Previous approaches for robust forecast… ▽ More Forecast aggregation combines the predictions of multiple forecasters to improve accuracy. However, the lack of knowledge about forecasters' information structure hinders optimal aggregation. Given a family of information structures, robust forecast aggregation aims to find the aggregator with minimal worst-case regret compared to the omniscient aggregator. Previous approaches for robust forecast aggregation rely on heuristic observations and parameter tuning. We propose an algorithmic framework for robust forecast aggregation. Our framework provides efficient approximation schemes for general information aggregation with a finite family of possible information structures. In the setting considered by Arieli et al. (2018) where two agents receive independent signals conditioned on a binary state, our framework also provides efficient approximation schemes by imposing Lipschitz conditions on the aggregator or discrete conditions on agents' reports. Numerical experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by providing a nearly optimal aggregator in the setting considered by Arieli et al. (2018). △ Less

Submitted 31 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Regulation of Algorithmic Collusion

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Sheng Long, Chenhao Zhang

Abstract: Consider sellers in a competitive market that use algorithms to adapt their prices from data that they collect. In such a context it is plausible that algorithms could arrive at prices that are higher than the competitive prices and this may benefit sellers at the expense of consumers (i.e., the buyers in the market). This paper gives a definition of plausible algorithmic non-collusion for pricing… ▽ More Consider sellers in a competitive market that use algorithms to adapt their prices from data that they collect. In such a context it is plausible that algorithms could arrive at prices that are higher than the competitive prices and this may benefit sellers at the expense of consumers (i.e., the buyers in the market). This paper gives a definition of plausible algorithmic non-collusion for pricing algorithms. The definition allows a regulator to empirically audit algorithms by applying a statistical test to the data that they collect. Algorithms that are good, i.e., approximately optimize prices to market conditions, can be augmented to contain the data sufficient to pass the audit. Algorithms that have colluded on, e.g., supra-competitive prices cannot pass the audit. The definition allows sellers to possess useful side information that may be correlated with supply and demand and could affect the prices used by good algorithms. The paper provides an analysis of the statistical complexity of such an audit, i.e., how much data is sufficient for the test of non-collusion to be accurate. △ Less

Submitted 28 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Optimal Scoring Rules for Multi-dimensional Effort

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Liren Shan, Yingkai Li, Yifan Wu

Abstract: This paper develops a framework for the design of scoring rules to optimally incentivize an agent to exert a multi-dimensional effort. This framework is a generalization to strategic agents of the classical knapsack problem (cf. Briest, Krysta, and Vöcking, 2005, Singer, 2010) and it is foundational to applying algorithmic mechanism design to the classroom. The paper identifies two simple families… ▽ More This paper develops a framework for the design of scoring rules to optimally incentivize an agent to exert a multi-dimensional effort. This framework is a generalization to strategic agents of the classical knapsack problem (cf. Briest, Krysta, and Vöcking, 2005, Singer, 2010) and it is foundational to applying algorithmic mechanism design to the classroom. The paper identifies two simple families of scoring rules that guarantee constant approximations to the optimal scoring rule. The truncated separate scoring rule is the sum of single dimensional scoring rules that is truncated to the bounded range of feasible scores. The threshold scoring rule gives the maximum score if reports exceed a threshold and zero otherwise. Approximate optimality of one or the other of these rules is similar to the bundling or selling separately result of Babaioff, Immorlica, Lucier, and Weinberg (2014). Finally, we show that the approximate optimality of the best of those two simple scoring rules is robust when the agent's choice of effort is made sequentially. △ Less

Submitted 29 June, 2023; v1 submitted 6 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Algorithmic Learning Foundations for Common Law

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Daniel W. Linna Jr., Liren Shan, Alex Tang

Abstract: This paper looks at a common law legal system as a learning algorithm, models specific features of legal proceedings, and asks whether this system learns efficiently. A particular feature of our model is explicitly viewing various aspects of court proceedings as learning algorithms. This viewpoint enables directly pointing out that when the costs of going to court are not commensurate with the ben… ▽ More This paper looks at a common law legal system as a learning algorithm, models specific features of legal proceedings, and asks whether this system learns efficiently. A particular feature of our model is explicitly viewing various aspects of court proceedings as learning algorithms. This viewpoint enables directly pointing out that when the costs of going to court are not commensurate with the benefits of going to court, there is a failure of learning and inaccurate outcomes will persist in cases that settle. Specifically, cases are brought to court at an insufficient rate. On the other hand, when individuals can be compelled or incentivized to bring their cases to court, the system can learn and inaccuracy vanishes over time. △ Less

Submitted 8 September, 2022; v1 submitted 6 September, 2022; originally announced September 2022.

Revelation Gap for Pricing from Samples

Authors: Yiding Feng, Jason D. Hartline, Yingkai Li

Abstract: This paper considers prior-independent mechanism design, in which a single mechanism is designed to achieve approximately optimal performance on every prior distribution from a given class. Most results in this literature focus on mechanisms with truthtelling equilibria, a.k.a., truthful mechanisms. Feng and Hartline (2018) introduce the revelation gap to quantify the loss of the restriction to tr… ▽ More This paper considers prior-independent mechanism design, in which a single mechanism is designed to achieve approximately optimal performance on every prior distribution from a given class. Most results in this literature focus on mechanisms with truthtelling equilibria, a.k.a., truthful mechanisms. Feng and Hartline (2018) introduce the revelation gap to quantify the loss of the restriction to truthful mechanisms. We solve a main open question left in Feng and Hartline (2018); namely, we identify a non-trivial revelation gap for revenue maximization. Our analysis focuses on the canonical problem of selling a single item to a single agent with only access to a single sample from the agent's valuation distribution. We identify the sample-bid mechanism (a simple non-truthful mechanism) and upper-bound its prior-independent approximation ratio by 1.835 (resp. 1.296) for regular (resp. MHR) distributions. We further prove that no truthful mechanism can achieve prior-independent approximation ratio better than 1.957 (resp. 1.543) for regular (resp. MHR) distributions. Thus, a non-trivial revelation gap is shown as the sample-bid mechanism outperforms the optimal prior-independent truthful mechanism. On the hardness side, we prove that no (possibly non-truthful) mechanism can achieve prior-independent approximation ratio better than 1.073 even for uniform distributions. △ Less

Submitted 26 February, 2021; originally announced February 2021.

Comments: This paper will appear in Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 2021 (STOC'21)

Optimization of Scoring Rules

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Yingkai Li, Liren Shan, Yifan Wu

Abstract: This paper introduces an objective for optimizing proper scoring rules. The objective is to maximize the increase in payoff of a forecaster who exerts a binary level of effort to refine a posterior belief from a prior belief. In this framework we characterize optimal scoring rules in simple settings, give efficient algorithms for computing optimal scoring rules in complex settings, and identify si… ▽ More This paper introduces an objective for optimizing proper scoring rules. The objective is to maximize the increase in payoff of a forecaster who exerts a binary level of effort to refine a posterior belief from a prior belief. In this framework we characterize optimal scoring rules in simple settings, give efficient algorithms for computing optimal scoring rules in complex settings, and identify simple scoring rules that are approximately optimal. In comparison, standard scoring rules in theory and practice -- for example the quadratic rule, scoring rules for the expectation, and scoring rules for multiple tasks that are averages of single-task scoring rules -- can be very far from optimal. △ Less

Submitted 17 April, 2022; v1 submitted 6 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Optimal Auctions vs. Anonymous Pricing: Beyond Linear Utility

Authors: Yiding Feng, Jason D. Hartline, Yingkai Li

Abstract: The revenue optimal mechanism for selling a single item to agents with independent but non-identically distributed values is complex for agents with linear utility (Myerson,1981) and has no closed-form characterization for agents with non-linear utility (cf. Alaei et al., 2012). Nonetheless, for linear utility agents satisfying a natural regularity property, Alaei et al. (2018) showed that simply… ▽ More The revenue optimal mechanism for selling a single item to agents with independent but non-identically distributed values is complex for agents with linear utility (Myerson,1981) and has no closed-form characterization for agents with non-linear utility (cf. Alaei et al., 2012). Nonetheless, for linear utility agents satisfying a natural regularity property, Alaei et al. (2018) showed that simply posting an anonymous price is an e-approximation. We give a parameterization of the regularity property that extends to agents with non-linear utility and show that the approximation bound of anonymous pricing for regular agents approximately extends to agents that satisfy this approximate regularity property. We apply this approximation framework to prove that anonymous pricing is a constant approximation to the revenue optimal single-item auction for agents with public-budget utility, private-budget utility, and (a special case of) risk-averse utility. △ Less

Submitted 20 November, 2020; v1 submitted 10 May, 2019; originally announced May 2019.

Comments: Appeared at EC 2019

A Truthful Cardinal Mechanism for One-Sided Matching

Authors: Rediet Abebe, Richard Cole, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: We revisit the well-studied problem of designing mechanisms for one-sided matching markets, where a set of $n$ agents needs to be matched to a set of $n$ heterogeneous items. Each agent $i$ has a value $v_{i,j}$ for each item $j$, and these values are private information that the agents may misreport if doing so leads to a preferred outcome. Ensuring that the agents have no incentive to misreport… ▽ More We revisit the well-studied problem of designing mechanisms for one-sided matching markets, where a set of $n$ agents needs to be matched to a set of $n$ heterogeneous items. Each agent $i$ has a value $v_{i,j}$ for each item $j$, and these values are private information that the agents may misreport if doing so leads to a preferred outcome. Ensuring that the agents have no incentive to misreport requires a careful design of the matching mechanism, and mechanisms proposed in the literature mitigate this issue by eliciting only the \emph{ordinal} preferences of the agents, i.e., their ranking of the items from most to least preferred. However, the efficiency guarantees of these mechanisms are based only on weak measures that are oblivious to the underlying values. In this paper we achieve stronger performance guarantees by introducing a mechanism that truthfully elicits the full \emph{cardinal} preferences of the agents, i.e., all of the $v_{i,j}$ values. We evaluate the performance of this mechanism using the much more demanding Nash bargaining solution as a benchmark, and we prove that our mechanism significantly outperforms all ordinal mechanisms (even non-truthful ones). To prove our approximation bounds, we also study the population monotonicity of the Nash bargaining solution in the context of matching markets, providing both upper and lower bounds which are of independent interest. △ Less

Submitted 20 January, 2020; v1 submitted 18 March, 2019; originally announced March 2019.

Comments: Appears in SODA 2020

Journal ref: Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (pp. 2096-2113). Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)

An End-to-end Argument in Mechanism Design (Prior-independent Auctions for Budgeted Agents)

Authors: Yiding Feng, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: This paper considers prior-independent mechanism design, namely identifying a single mechanism that has near optimal performance on every prior distribution. We show that mechanisms with truthtelling equilibria, a.k.a., revelation mechanisms, do not always give optimal prior-independent mechanisms and we define the revelation gap to quantify the non-optimality of revelation mechanisms. This study… ▽ More This paper considers prior-independent mechanism design, namely identifying a single mechanism that has near optimal performance on every prior distribution. We show that mechanisms with truthtelling equilibria, a.k.a., revelation mechanisms, do not always give optimal prior-independent mechanisms and we define the revelation gap to quantify the non-optimality of revelation mechanisms. This study suggests that it is important to develop a theory for the design of non-revelation mechanisms. Our analysis focuses on welfare maximization in single-item auctions for agents with budgets and a natural regularity assumption on their distribution of values. The all-pay auction (a non-revelation mechanism) is the Bayesian optimal mechanism; as it is prior-independent it is also the prior-independent optimal mechanism (a 1-approximation). We prove a lower bound on the prior-independent approximation of revelation mechanisms of 1.013 and that the clinching auction (a revelation mechanism) is a prior-independent $e \approx 2.714$ approximation. Thus the revelation gap for single-item welfare maximization with public budget agents is in $[1.013, e]$. Some of our analyses extend to the revenue objective, position environments, and irregular distributions. △ Less

Submitted 30 July, 2018; v1 submitted 5 April, 2018; originally announced April 2018.

Mechanism Redesign

Authors: Shuchi Chawla, Jason D. Hartline, Denis Nekipelov, Anant Shah

Abstract: This paper develops the theory of mechanism redesign by which an auctioneer can reoptimize an auction based on bid data collected from previous iterations of the auction on bidders from the same market. We give a direct method for estimation of the revenue of a counterfactual auction from the bids in the current auction. The estimator is a simple weighted order statistic of the bids and has the op… ▽ More This paper develops the theory of mechanism redesign by which an auctioneer can reoptimize an auction based on bid data collected from previous iterations of the auction on bidders from the same market. We give a direct method for estimation of the revenue of a counterfactual auction from the bids in the current auction. The estimator is a simple weighted order statistic of the bids and has the optimal error rate. Two applications of our estimator are A/B testing (a.k.a., randomized controlled trials) and instrumented optimization (i.e., revenue optimization subject to being able to do accurate inference of any counterfactual auction revenue). △ Less

Submitted 12 February, 2022; v1 submitted 15 August, 2017; originally announced August 2017.

Comments: This paper combines and improves upon results from manuscripts "Mechanism Design for Data Science" (arXiv:1404.5971) and "A/B Testing of Auctions" (arXiv:1606.00908)

A/B Testing of Auctions

Authors: Shuchi Chawla, Jason D. Hartline, Denis Nekipelov

Abstract: For many application areas A/B testing, which partitions users of a system into an A (control) and B (treatment) group to experiment between several application designs, enables Internet companies to optimize their services to the behavioral patterns of their users. Unfortunately, the A/B testing framework cannot be applied in a straightforward manner to applications like auctions where the users… ▽ More For many application areas A/B testing, which partitions users of a system into an A (control) and B (treatment) group to experiment between several application designs, enables Internet companies to optimize their services to the behavioral patterns of their users. Unfortunately, the A/B testing framework cannot be applied in a straightforward manner to applications like auctions where the users (a.k.a., bidders) submit bids before the partitioning into the A and B groups is made. This paper combines auction theoretic modeling with the A/B testing framework to develop methodology for A/B testing auctions. The accuracy of our method %, assuming the auction is directly comparable to ideal A/B testing where there is no interference between A and B. Our results are based on an extension and improved analysis of the inference method of Chawla et al. (2014). △ Less

Submitted 2 June, 2016; originally announced June 2016.

Bayesian Budget Feasibility with Posted Pricing

Authors: Eric Balkanski, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: We consider the problem of budget feasible mechanism design proposed by Singer (2010), but in a Bayesian setting. A principal has a public value for hiring a subset of the agents and a budget, while the agents have private costs for being hired. We consider both additive and submodular value functions of the principal. We show that there are simple, practical, ex post budget balanced posted pricin… ▽ More We consider the problem of budget feasible mechanism design proposed by Singer (2010), but in a Bayesian setting. A principal has a public value for hiring a subset of the agents and a budget, while the agents have private costs for being hired. We consider both additive and submodular value functions of the principal. We show that there are simple, practical, ex post budget balanced posted pricing mechanisms that approximate the value obtained by the Bayesian optimal mechanism that is budget balanced only in expectation. A main motivating application for this work is the crowdsourcing large projects, e.g., on Mechanical Turk, where workers are drawn from a large population and posted pricing is standard. Our analysis methods relate to contention resolution schemes in submodular optimization of Vondrak et al. (2011) and the correlation gap analysis of Yan (2011). △ Less

Submitted 21 October, 2015; v1 submitted 12 June, 2015; originally announced June 2015.

Optimal Platform Design

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Tim Roughgarden

Abstract: An auction house cannot generally provide the optimal auction technology to every client. Instead it provides one or several auction technologies, and clients select the most appropriate one. For example, eBay provides ascending auctions and "buy-it-now" pricing. For each client the offered technology may not be optimal, but it would be too costly for clients to create their own. We call these mec… ▽ More An auction house cannot generally provide the optimal auction technology to every client. Instead it provides one or several auction technologies, and clients select the most appropriate one. For example, eBay provides ascending auctions and "buy-it-now" pricing. For each client the offered technology may not be optimal, but it would be too costly for clients to create their own. We call these mechanisms, which emphasize generality rather than optimality, platform mechanisms. A platform mechanism will be adopted by a client if its performance exceeds that of the client's outside option, e.g., hiring (at a cost) a consultant to design the optimal mechanism. We ask two related questions. First, for what costs of the outside option will the platform be universally adopted? Second, what is the structure of good platform mechanisms? We answer these questions using a novel prior-free analysis framework in which we seek mechanisms that are approximately optimal for every prior. △ Less

Submitted 29 December, 2014; originally announced December 2014.

Comments: There is some overlap between this paper and the paper "Optimal Mechanism Design and Money Burning," which appeared in the STOC 2008 conference and as arXiv:0804.2097. However, the focus of this paper is different, with some of our earlier results omitted and several new results included

Prior-Independent Mechanisms for Scheduling

Authors: Shuchi Chawla, Jason D. Hartline, David Malec, Balasubramanian Sivan

Abstract: We study the makespan minimization problem with unrelated selfish machines under the assumption that job sizes are stochastic. We design simple truthful mechanisms that under various distributional assumptions provide constant and sublogarithmic approximations to expected makespan. Our mechanisms are prior-independent in that they do not rely on knowledge of the job size distributions. Prior-indep… ▽ More We study the makespan minimization problem with unrelated selfish machines under the assumption that job sizes are stochastic. We design simple truthful mechanisms that under various distributional assumptions provide constant and sublogarithmic approximations to expected makespan. Our mechanisms are prior-independent in that they do not rely on knowledge of the job size distributions. Prior-independent approximation mechanisms have been previously studied for the objective of revenue maximization [Dhangwatnotai, Roughgarden and Yan'10, Devanur, Hartline, Karlin and Nguyen'11, Roughgarden, Talgam-Cohen and Yan'12]. In contrast to our results, in prior-free settings no truthful anonymous deterministic mechanism for the makespan objective can provide a sublinear approximation [Ashlagi, Dobzinski and Lavi'09]. △ Less

Submitted 2 May, 2013; originally announced May 2013.

Comments: This paper will appear in Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 2013 (STOC'13)

Prior-free Auctions for Budgeted Agents

Authors: Nikhil R. Devanur, Bach Q. Ha, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: We consider prior-free auctions for revenue and welfare maximization when agents have a common budget. The abstract environments we consider are ones where there is a downward-closed and symmetric feasibility constraint on the probabilities of service of the agents. These environments include position auctions where slots with decreasing click-through rates are auctioned to advertisers. We general… ▽ More We consider prior-free auctions for revenue and welfare maximization when agents have a common budget. The abstract environments we consider are ones where there is a downward-closed and symmetric feasibility constraint on the probabilities of service of the agents. These environments include position auctions where slots with decreasing click-through rates are auctioned to advertisers. We generalize and characterize the envy-free benchmark from Hartline and Yan (2011) to settings with budgets and characterize the optimal envy-free outcomes for both welfare and revenue. We give prior-free mechanisms that approximate these benchmarks. A building block in our mechanism is a clinching auction for position auction environments. This auction is a generalization of the multi-unit clinching auction of Dobzinski et al. (2008) and a special case of the polyhedral clinching auction of Goel et al. (2012). For welfare maximization, we show that this clinching auction is a good approximation to the envy-free optimal welfare for position auction environments. For profit maximization, we generalize the random sampling profit extraction auction from Fiat et al. (2002) for digital goods to give a 10.0-approximation to the envy-free optimal revenue in symmetric, downward-closed environments. The profit maximization question is of interest even without budgets and our mechanism is a 7.5-approximation which improving on the 30.4 bound of Ha and Hartline (2012). △ Less

Submitted 23 December, 2012; originally announced December 2012.

Envy Freedom and Prior-free Mechanism Design

Authors: Nikhil R. Devanur, Jason D. Hartline, Qiqi Yan

Abstract: We consider the provision of an abstract service to single-dimensional agents. Our model includes position auctions, single-minded combinatorial auctions, and constrained matching markets. When the agents' values are drawn from a distribution, the Bayesian optimal mechanism is given by Myerson (1981) as a virtual-surplus optimizer. We develop a framework for prior-free mechanism design and analysi… ▽ More We consider the provision of an abstract service to single-dimensional agents. Our model includes position auctions, single-minded combinatorial auctions, and constrained matching markets. When the agents' values are drawn from a distribution, the Bayesian optimal mechanism is given by Myerson (1981) as a virtual-surplus optimizer. We develop a framework for prior-free mechanism design and analysis. A good mechanism in our framework approximates the optimal mechanism for the distribution if there is a distribution; moreover, when there is no distribution this mechanism still performs well. We define and characterize optimal envy-free outcomes in symmetric single-dimensional environments. Our characterization mirrors Myerson's theory. Furthermore, unlike in mechanism design where there is no point-wise optimal mechanism, there is always a point-wise optimal envy-free outcome. Envy-free outcomes and incentive-compatible mechanisms are similar in structure and performance. We therefore use the optimal envy-free revenue as a benchmark for measuring the performance of a prior-free mechanism. A good mechanism is one that approximates the envy free benchmark on any profile of agent values. We show that good mechanisms exist, and in particular, a natural generalization of the random sampling auction of Goldberg et al. (2001) is a constant approximation. △ Less

Submitted 15 December, 2012; originally announced December 2012.

The Biased Sampling Profit Extraction Auction

Authors: Bach Q. Ha, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: We give an auction for downward-closed environments that generalizes the random sampling profit extraction auction for digital goods of Fiat et al. (2002). The mechanism divides the agents in to a market and a sample using a biased coin and attempts to extract the optimal revenue from the sample from the market. The latter step is done with the downward-closed profit extractor of Ha and Hartline (… ▽ More We give an auction for downward-closed environments that generalizes the random sampling profit extraction auction for digital goods of Fiat et al. (2002). The mechanism divides the agents in to a market and a sample using a biased coin and attempts to extract the optimal revenue from the sample from the market. The latter step is done with the downward-closed profit extractor of Ha and Hartline (2012). The auction is a 11-approximation to the envyfree benchmark in downward-closed permutation environments. This is an improvement on the previously best known results of 12.5 for matroid and 30.4 for downward-closed permutation environments that are due to Devanur et al. (2012) and Ha and Hartline (2012), respectively. △ Less

Submitted 21 June, 2012; originally announced June 2012.

Comments: 4 pages

Optimal Crowdsourcing Contests

Authors: Shuchi Chawla, Jason D. Hartline, Balasubramanian Sivan

Abstract: We study the design and approximation of optimal crowdsourcing contests. Crowdsourcing contests can be modeled as all-pay auctions because entrants must exert effort up-front to enter. Unlike all-pay auctions where a usual design objective would be to maximize revenue, in crowdsourcing contests, the principal only benefits from the submission with the highest quality. We give a theory for optimal… ▽ More We study the design and approximation of optimal crowdsourcing contests. Crowdsourcing contests can be modeled as all-pay auctions because entrants must exert effort up-front to enter. Unlike all-pay auctions where a usual design objective would be to maximize revenue, in crowdsourcing contests, the principal only benefits from the submission with the highest quality. We give a theory for optimal crowdsourcing contests that mirrors the theory of optimal auction design: the optimal crowdsourcing contest is a virtual valuation optimizer (the virtual valuation function depends on the distribution of contestant skills and the number of contestants). We also compare crowdsourcing contests with more conventional means of procurement. In this comparison, crowdsourcing contests are relatively disadvantaged because the effort of losing contestants is wasted. Nonetheless, we show that crowdsourcing contests are 2-approximations to conventional methods for a large family of "regular" distributions, and 4-approximations, otherwise. △ Less

Submitted 11 November, 2011; originally announced November 2011.

Comments: The paper has 17 pages and 1 figure. It is to appear in the proceedings of ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms 2012

Mechanism Design via Consensus Estimates, Cross Checking, and Profit Extraction

Authors: Bach Q. Ha, Jason D. Hartline

Abstract: There is only one technique for prior-free optimal mechanism design that generalizes beyond the structurally benevolent setting of digital goods. This technique uses random sampling to estimate the distribution of agent values and then employs the Bayesian optimal mechanism for this estimated distribution on the remaining players. Though quite general, even for digital goods, this random sampling… ▽ More There is only one technique for prior-free optimal mechanism design that generalizes beyond the structurally benevolent setting of digital goods. This technique uses random sampling to estimate the distribution of agent values and then employs the Bayesian optimal mechanism for this estimated distribution on the remaining players. Though quite general, even for digital goods, this random sampling auction has a complicated analysis and is known to be suboptimal. To overcome these issues we generalize the consensus technique from Goldberg and Hartline (2003) to structurally rich environments that include, e.g., single-minded combinatorial auctions. △ Less

Submitted 23 August, 2011; originally announced August 2011.

Comments: 12 pages, 2 figures

Bayesian Algorithmic Mechanism Design

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Brendan Lucier

Abstract: The principal problem in algorithmic mechanism design is in merging the incentive constraints imposed by selfish behavior with the algorithmic constraints imposed by computational intractability. This field is motivated by the observation that the preeminent approach for designing incentive compatible mechanisms, namely that of Vickrey, Clarke, and Groves; and the central approach for circumventin… ▽ More The principal problem in algorithmic mechanism design is in merging the incentive constraints imposed by selfish behavior with the algorithmic constraints imposed by computational intractability. This field is motivated by the observation that the preeminent approach for designing incentive compatible mechanisms, namely that of Vickrey, Clarke, and Groves; and the central approach for circumventing computational obstacles, that of approximation algorithms, are fundamentally incompatible: natural applications of the VCG approach to an approximation algorithm fails to yield an incentive compatible mechanism. We consider relaxing the desideratum of (ex post) incentive compatibility (IC) to Bayesian incentive compatibility (BIC), where truthtelling is a Bayes-Nash equilibrium (the standard notion of incentive compatibility in economics). For welfare maximization in single-parameter agent settings, we give a general black-box reduction that turns any approximation algorithm into a Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism with essentially the same approximation factor. △ Less

Submitted 23 February, 2011; v1 submitted 25 September, 2009; originally announced September 2009.

Optimal Mechansim Design and Money Burning

Authors: Jason D. Hartline, Tim Roughgarden

Abstract: Mechanism design is now a standard tool in computer science for aligning the incentives of self-interested agents with the objectives of a system designer. There is, however, a fundamental disconnect between the traditional application domains of mechanism design (such as auctions) and those arising in computer science (such as networks): while monetary transfers (i.e., payments) are essential f… ▽ More Mechanism design is now a standard tool in computer science for aligning the incentives of self-interested agents with the objectives of a system designer. There is, however, a fundamental disconnect between the traditional application domains of mechanism design (such as auctions) and those arising in computer science (such as networks): while monetary transfers (i.e., payments) are essential for most of the known positive results in mechanism design, they are undesirable or even technologically infeasible in many computer systems. Classical impossibility results imply that the reach of mechanisms without transfers is severely limited. Computer systems typically do have the ability to reduce service quality--routing systems can drop or delay traffic, scheduling protocols can delay the release of jobs, and computational payment schemes can require computational payments from users (e.g., in spam-fighting systems). Service degradation is tantamount to requiring that users burn money}, and such ``payments'' can be used to influence the preferences of the agents at a cost of degrading the social surplus. We develop a framework for the design and analysis of money-burning mechanisms to maximize the residual surplus--the total value of the chosen outcome minus the payments required. △ Less

Submitted 14 April, 2008; originally announced April 2008.

Comments: 23 pages, 1 figure