-
The Limits of Interval-Regulated Price Discrimination
Authors:
Kamesh Munagala,
Yiheng Shen,
Renzhe Xu
Abstract:
In this paper, we study third-degree price discrimination in a model first presented in Bergemann, Brooks, and Morris [2015]. Since such price discrimination might create market segments with vastly different posted prices, we consider regulating these prices, specifically, via restricting them to lie within an interval. Given a price interval, we consider segmentations of the market where a selle…
▽ More
In this paper, we study third-degree price discrimination in a model first presented in Bergemann, Brooks, and Morris [2015]. Since such price discrimination might create market segments with vastly different posted prices, we consider regulating these prices, specifically, via restricting them to lie within an interval. Given a price interval, we consider segmentations of the market where a seller, who is oblivious to the existence of such regulation, still posts prices within the price interval. We show the following surprising result: For any market and price interval where such segmentation is feasible, there is always a different segmentation that optimally transfers all excess surplus to the consumers. In addition, we characterize the entire space of buyer and seller surplus that are achievable by such segmentation, including maximizing seller surplus, and simultaneously minimizing buyer and seller surplus.
△ Less
Submitted 10 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Fair Price Discrimination
Authors:
Siddhartha Banerjee,
Kamesh Munagala,
Yiheng Shen,
Kangning Wang
Abstract:
A seller is pricing identical copies of a good to a stream of unit-demand buyers. Each buyer has a value on the good as his private information. The seller only knows the empirical value distribution of the buyer population and chooses the revenue-optimal price. We consider a widely studied third-degree price discrimination model where an information intermediary with perfect knowledge of the arri…
▽ More
A seller is pricing identical copies of a good to a stream of unit-demand buyers. Each buyer has a value on the good as his private information. The seller only knows the empirical value distribution of the buyer population and chooses the revenue-optimal price. We consider a widely studied third-degree price discrimination model where an information intermediary with perfect knowledge of the arriving buyer's value sends a signal to the seller, hence changing the seller's posterior and inducing the seller to set a personalized posted price. Prior work of Bergemann, Brooks, and Morris (American Economic Review, 2015) has shown the existence of a signaling scheme that preserves seller revenue, while always selling the item, hence maximizing consumer surplus. In a departure from prior work, we ask whether the consumer surplus generated is fairly distributed among buyers with different values. To this end, we aim to maximize welfare functions that reward more balanced surplus allocations.
Our main result is the surprising existence of a novel signaling scheme that simultaneously $8$-approximates all welfare functions that are non-negative, monotonically increasing, symmetric, and concave, compared with any other signaling scheme. Classical examples of such welfare functions include the utilitarian social welfare, the Nash welfare, and the max-min welfare. Such a guarantee cannot be given by any consumer-surplus-maximizing scheme -- which are the ones typically studied in the literature. In addition, our scheme is socially efficient, and has the fairness property that buyers with higher values enjoy higher expected surplus, which is not always the case for existing schemes.
△ Less
Submitted 11 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Approximate Core for Committee Selection via Multilinear Extension and Market Clearing
Authors:
Kamesh Munagala,
Yiheng Shen,
Kangning Wang,
Zhiyi Wang
Abstract:
Motivated by civic problems such as participatory budgeting and multiwinner elections, we consider the problem of public good allocation: Given a set of indivisible projects (or candidates) of different sizes, and voters with different monotone utility functions over subsets of these candidates, the goal is to choose a budget-constrained subset of these candidates (or a committee) that provides fa…
▽ More
Motivated by civic problems such as participatory budgeting and multiwinner elections, we consider the problem of public good allocation: Given a set of indivisible projects (or candidates) of different sizes, and voters with different monotone utility functions over subsets of these candidates, the goal is to choose a budget-constrained subset of these candidates (or a committee) that provides fair utility to the voters. The notion of fairness we adopt is that of core stability from cooperative game theory: No subset of voters should be able to choose another blocking committee of proportionally smaller size that provides strictly larger utility to all voters that deviate. The core provides a strong notion of fairness, subsuming other notions that have been widely studied in computational social choice.
It is well-known that an exact core need not exist even when utility functions of the voters are additive across candidates. We therefore relax the problem to allow approximation: Voters can only deviate to the blocking committee if after they choose any extra candidate (called an additament), their utility still increases by an $α$ factor. If no blocking committee exists under this definition, we call this an $α$-core.
Our main result is that an $α$-core, for $α< 67.37$, always exists when utilities of the voters are arbitrary monotone submodular functions, and this can be computed in polynomial time. This result improves to $α< 9.27$ for additive utilities, albeit without the polynomial time guarantee. Our results are a significant improvement over prior work that only shows logarithmic approximations for the case of additive utilities. We complement our results with a lower bound of $α> 1.015$ for submodular utilities, and a lower bound of any function in the number of voters and candidates for general monotone utilities.
△ Less
Submitted 24 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
Optimal Algorithms for Multiwinner Elections and the Chamberlin-Courant Rule
Authors:
Kamesh Munagala,
Zeyu Shen,
Kangning Wang
Abstract:
We consider the algorithmic question of choosing a subset of candidates of a given size $k$ from a set of $m$ candidates, with knowledge of voters' ordinal rankings over all candidates. We consider the well-known and classic scoring rule for achieving diverse representation: the Chamberlin-Courant (CC) or $1$-Borda rule, where the score of a committee is the average over the voters, of the rank of…
▽ More
We consider the algorithmic question of choosing a subset of candidates of a given size $k$ from a set of $m$ candidates, with knowledge of voters' ordinal rankings over all candidates. We consider the well-known and classic scoring rule for achieving diverse representation: the Chamberlin-Courant (CC) or $1$-Borda rule, where the score of a committee is the average over the voters, of the rank of the best candidate in the committee for that voter; and its generalization to the average of the top $s$ best candidates, called the $s$-Borda rule.
Our first result is an improved analysis of the natural and well-studied greedy heuristic. We show that greedy achieves a $\left(1 - \frac{2}{k+1}\right)$-approximation to the maximization (or satisfaction) version of CC rule, and a $\left(1 - \frac{2s}{k+1}\right)$-approximation to the $s$-Borda score. Our result improves on the best known approximation algorithm for this problem. We show that these bounds are almost tight.
For the dissatisfaction (or minimization) version of the problem, we show that the score of $\frac{m+1}{k+1}$ can be viewed as an optimal benchmark for the CC rule, as it is essentially the best achievable score of any polynomial-time algorithm even when the optimal score is a polynomial factor smaller (under standard computational complexity assumptions). We show that another well-studied algorithm for this problem, called the Banzhaf rule, attains this benchmark.
We finally show that for the $s$-Borda rule, when the optimal value is small, these algorithms can be improved by a factor of $\tilde Ω(\sqrt{s})$ via LP rounding. Our upper and lower bounds are a significant improvement over previous results, and taken together, not only enable us to perform a finer comparison of greedy algorithms for these problems, but also provide analytic justification for using such algorithms in practice.
△ Less
Submitted 31 May, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
