Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Nearly Equitable Allocations Beyond Additivity and Monotonicity (2312.07195v1)

Published 12 Dec 2023 in cs.GT

Abstract: Equitability (EQ) in fair division requires that items be allocated such that all agents value the bundle they receive equally. With indivisible items, an equitable allocation may not exist, and hence we instead consider a meaningful analog, EQx, that requires equitability up to any item. EQx allocations exist for monotone, additive valuations. However, if (1) the agents' valuations are not additive or (2) the set of indivisible items includes both goods and chores (positively and negatively valued items), then prior to the current work it was not known whether EQx allocations exist or not. We study both the existence and efficient computation of EQx allocations. (1) For monotone valuations (not necessarily additive), we show that EQx allocations always exist. Also, for the large class of weakly well-layered valuations, EQx allocations can be found in polynomial time. Further, we prove that approximately EQx allocations can be computed efficiently under general monotone valuations. (2) For non-monotone valuations, we show that an EQx allocation may not exist, even for two agents with additive valuations. Under some special cases, however, we establish existence and efficient computability of EQx allocations. This includes the case of two agents with additive valuations where each item is either a good or a chore, and there are no mixed items. In addition, we show that, under nonmonotone valuations, determining the existence of EQx allocations is weakly NP-hard for two agents and strongly NP-hard for more agents.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (27)
  1. The efficiency of fair division with connected pieces. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation (TEAC), 3(4):1–16, 2015.
  2. Almost group envy-free allocation of indivisible goods and chores. In Christian Bessiere, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2020, pages 39–45. ijcai.org, 2020.
  3. The price of equity with binary valuations and few agent types. CoRR, abs/2307.06726, 2023.
  4. Fair chore division under binary supermodular costs. In Noa Agmon, Bo An, Alessandro Ricci, and William Yeoh, editors, Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2023, London, United Kingdom, 29 May 2023 - 2 June 2023, pages 2863–2865. ACM, 2023.
  5. On the existence of equitable cake divisions. Information Sciences, 228:239–245, 2013.
  6. Guillaume Chèze. Existence of a simple and equitable fair division: A short proof. Mathematical Social Sciences, 87:92–93, 2017.
  7. The Efficiency of Fair Division. Theory of Computing Systems, 50(4):589–610, 2012.
  8. The fairness of leximin in allocation of indivisible chores. CoRR, abs/2005.04864, 2020.
  9. On the computability of equitable divisions. Discrete Optimization, 9(4):249–257, 2012.
  10. How to cut a cake fairly. The American Mathematical Monthly, 68(1P1):1–17, 1961.
  11. Duncan Karl Foley. Resource allocation and the public sector. Yale University, 1966.
  12. Equitable Allocations of Indivisible Goods. In Proceedings of the 28th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 280–286, 2019.
  13. Equitable Allocations of Indivisible Chores. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, pages 384–392, 2020.
  14. The frontier of intractability for EFX with two agents. CoRR, abs/2301.10354, 2023. To appear in SAGT ’23.
  15. Which is the fairest (rent division) of them all? J. ACM, 64(6):39:1–39:22, 2017.
  16. Near Fairness in Matroids. In Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 393–398, 2014.
  17. Near fairness in matroids. In Torsten Schaub, Gerhard Friedrich, and Barry O’Sullivan, editors, ECAI 2014 - 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 18-22 August 2014, Prague, Czech Republic - Including Prestigious Applications of Intelligent Systems (PAIS 2014), volume 263 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pages 393–398. IOS Press, 2014.
  18. Spliddit: Unleashing Fair Division Algorithms. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 13(2):41–46, 2015.
  19. Envy freeness in experimental fair division problems. Theory and decision, 67:65–100, 2009.
  20. Inequality aversion and efficiency with ordinal and cardinal social preferences—an experimental study. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 76(2):238–253, 2010.
  21. Julia Kagan. Equitable Distribution: Definition, State Laws, Exempt Property. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/equitable-division.asp, 2021. Accessed: 2023-08-12.
  22. Hervé Moulin. Fair division and collective welfare. MIT press, 2004.
  23. Almost Envy-Freeness with General Valuations. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 34(2):1039–1068, 2020.
  24. Almost envy-freeness with general valuations. SIAM J. Discret. Math., 34(2):1039–1068, 2020.
  25. A lower bound for equitable cake cutting. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pages 479–495, 2017.
  26. Equitability and welfare maximization for allocating indivisible items. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 37(1):8, 2023.
  27. Hal R Varian. Equity, Envy, and Efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory, 9(1):63–91, 1974.
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.