Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 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

Cutsets and EF1 Fair Division of Graphs (2402.05884v1)

Published 8 Feb 2024 in cs.GT and cs.MA

Abstract: In fair division of a connected graph $G = (V, E)$, each of $n$ agents receives a share of $G$'s vertex set $V$. These shares partition $V$, with each share required to induce a connected subgraph. Agents use their own valuation functions to determine the non-negative numerical values of the shares, which determine whether the allocation is fair in some specified sense. We introduce forbidden substructures called graph cutsets, which block divisions that are fair in the EF1 (envy-free up to one item) sense by cutting the graph into "too many pieces". Two parameters - gap and valence - determine blocked values of $n$. If $G$ guarantees connected EF1 allocations for $n$ agents with valuations that are CA (common and additive), then $G$ contains no elementary cutset of gap $k \ge 2$ and valence in the interval $[n - k + 1, n - 1]$. If $G$ guarantees connected EF1 allocations for $n$ agents with valuations in the broader CM (common and monotone) class, then $G$ contains no cutset of gap $k \ge 2$ and valence in the interval $[n - k + 1, n - 1]$. These results rule out the existence of connected EF1 allocations in a variety of situations. For some graphs $G$ we can, with help from some new positive results, pin down $G$'s spectrum - the list of exactly which values of $n$ do/do not guarantee connected EF1 allocations. Examples suggest a conjectured common spectral pattern for all graphs. Further, we show that it is NP-hard to determine whether a graph admits a cutset. We also provide an example of a (non-traceable) graph on eight vertices that has no cutsets of gap $\ge 2$ at all, yet fails to guarantee connected EF1 allocations for three agents with CA preferences.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (21)
  1. I. Bárány and V. S. Grinberg. Block partitions of sequences. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 206:155–164, 2015.
  2. The price of connectivity in fair division. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 36(2):1156–1186, 2022.
  3. Almost envy-free allocations with connected bundles. Games and Economic Behavior, 131:197–221, 2022.
  4. Fair division of a graph. In Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI17), pages 135–141, 2017.
  5. Fair division - from cake-cutting to dispute resolution. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
  6. E. Budish. The combinatorial assignment problem: Approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes. Journal of Political Economy, 119:1061–1103, 2011.
  7. The parameterized complexity of connected fair division. In Proceedings of the 30th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI21), pages 139–145, 2021.
  8. The complexity of envy-free graph cutting. In L. D. Raedt, editor, Proceedings of the 31st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI22), pages 237–243, 2022.
  9. Graphical cake cutting via maximin share. In Z. Zhou, editor, Proceedings of the 30th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI21), pages 161–167, 2021.
  10. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman, 1979.
  11. Contiguous cake cutting: Hardness results and approximation algorithms. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 69:109–401, 2020.
  12. A. Igarashi. How to cut a discrete cake fairly. Technical report, arXiv:2209.01348, 2022.
  13. A. Igarashi and D. Peters. Pareto-optimal allocation of indivisible goods with connectivity constraints. In Proceedings of the 33rd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI19), pages 2045–2052, 2019.
  14. A. Igarashi and W. S. Zwicker. Fair division of graphs and of tangled cakes. Mathematical Programming, pages 1–45, 2023. Special issue in memory of Michel Balinski.
  15. On approximately fair allocations of indivisible goods. In Proceedings the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC04), pages 125–131, 2004.
  16. Equitable division of a path, 2021.
  17. A. D. Procaccia. Cake cutting algorithms. In Handbook of Computational Social Choice. Cambridge, 2016.
  18. J. M. Robertson and W. Webb. Cake-Cutting Algorithms–Be Fair if You can. A K Peters, 1998.
  19. W. Stromquist. How to cut a cake fairly. The American Mathematical Monthly, 87(8):640–644, 1980.
  20. W. Suksompong. Constraints in fair division. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 19(2):46–61, 2021.
  21. M. Truszczynski and Z. Lonc. Maximin share allocations on cycles. Journal Artificial Intelligence Research, 69:613–655, 2020.

Summary

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