We study the envy free pricing problem faced by a seller who wishes to maximize revenue by setting prices for bundles of items. If there is an unlimited supply of items and agents are single minded then we show that finding the revenue maximizing envy free allocation pricing can be solved in polynomial time by reducing it to an instance of weighted independent set on a perfect graph. We define an allocation pricing as if no agent wishes to replace her allocation with the union of the allocations of some set of other agents and her price with the sum of their prices. We show that it is -hard to decide if a given allocation pricing is multi envy free. We also show that revenue maximization multi envy free allocation pricing is hard. Furthermore, we give efficient algorithms and hardness results for various variants of the highway problem.
Much of the work on envy free revenue maximization is on item pricing rather than on subset pricing. @cite_13 give an @math -approximation for the general single minded problem, where @math is the number of items and @math is the number of agents. This result was extended by @cite_4 to an @math -approximation for arbitrary valuations and unlimited supply using single fixed pricing which is basically pricing all bundles with the same price. @cite_6 show that the general item pricing problem with unlimited availability of items is hard to approximate within a (semi-)logarithmic factor.
@cite_13 @cite_6 @cite_4
2031502124 2952244728 2040618534 2088970293 1656659859 2169604085 1964207488 2082623911 2404718321 2951767300 141957916 2111957769 2592030152 2021734699 2949121341 1718157382 1495768673 2159007113 2121240598 2109741490
We consider the problem of pricing n items to maximize revenue when faced with a series of unknown buyers with complex preferences, and show that a simple pricing scheme achieves surprisingly strong guarantees. We show that in the unlimited supply setting, a random single price achieves expected revenue within a logarithmic factor of the total social welfare for customers with general valuation functions, which may not even necessarily be monotone. This generalizes work of Guruswami et. al [18], who show a logarithmic factor for only the special cases of single-minded and unit-demand customers. In the limited supply setting, we show that for subadditive valuations, a random single price achieves revenue within a factor of 2O(√(log n loglog n) of the total social welfare, i.e., the optimal revenue the seller could hope to extract even if the seller could price each bundle differently for every buyer. This is the best approximation known for any item pricing scheme for subadditive (or even submodular) valuations, even using multiple prices. We complement this result with a lower bound showing a sequence of subadditive (in fact, XOS) buyers for which any single price has approximation ratio 2Ω(log1 4 n), thus showing that single price schemes cannot achieve a polylogarithmic ratio. This lower bound demonstrates a clear distinction between revenue maximization and social welfare maximization in this setting, for which [12,10] show that a fixed price achieves a logarithmic approximation in the case of XOS [12], and more generally subadditive [10], customers. We also consider the multi-unit case examined by [1111] in the context of social welfare, and show that so long as no buyer requires more than a 1 -- e fraction of the items, a random single price now does in fact achieve revenue within an O(log n) factor of the maximum social welfare. 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 (2008) and a special case of the polyhedral clinching auction of (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 (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). We study envy-free (EF) mechanisms for multi-unit auctions with budgeted agents that approximately maximize revenue. In an EF auction, prices are set so that every bidder receives a bundle that maximizes her utility amongst all bundles; We show that the problem of revenue-maximizing EF auctions is NP-hard, even for the case of identical items and additive valuations (up to the budget). The main result of our paper is a novel EF auction that runs in polynomial time and provides a approximation of 1 2 with respect to the revenue-maximizing EF auction. A slight variant of our mechanism will produce an allocation and pricing that is more restrictive (so called item pricing) and gives a 1 2 approximation to the optimal revenue within this more restrictive class. Abstract Consider the revenue-maximizing problem in which a single seller wants to sell k different items to a single buyer, who has independently distributed values for the items with additive valuation. The case was completely resolved by Myerson’s classical work in 1981, whereas for larger k the problem has been the subject of much research efforts ever since. Recently, Hart and Nisan analyzed two simple mechanisms: selling the items separately, or selling them as a single bundle. They showed that selling separately guarantees at least a fraction of the optimal revenue; and for identically distributed items, bundling yields at least a fraction of the optimal revenue. In this paper, we prove that selling separately guarantees at least fraction of the optimal revenue, whereas for identically distributed items, bundling yields at least a constant fraction of the optimal revenue. These bounds are tight (up to a constant factor), settling the open questions raised by Hart and Nisan. The results are valid for arbitrary probability distributions without restrictions. Our results also have implications on other interesting issues, such as monotonicity and randomization of selling mechanisms. We study prior-free revenue maximization for a seller with unlimited supply of n item types facing m myopic buyers present for k < log n days. We show that a certain randomized schedule of posted prices has an approximation factor of O(log m+log n k). This algorithm relies on buyer valuations having hereditary maximizers, a novel natural property satisfied for example by gross substitutes valuations. We obtain a matching lower bound with multi-unit valuations. In light of existing results [2], k days can thus improve the approximation by a Θ(k) factor. We also provide a posted price schedule with the same factor for positive affine allocative externalities, despite an increase in the optimal revenue. Myerson's classic result provides a full description of how a seller can maximize revenue when selling a single item. We address the question of revenue maximization in the simplest possible multi-item setting: two items and a single buyer who has independently distributed values for the items, and an additive valuation. In general, the revenue achievable from selling two independent items may be strictly higher than the sum of the revenues obtainable by selling each of them separately. In fact, the structure of optimal (i.e., revenue-maximizing) mechanisms for two items even in this simple setting is not understood. In this paper we obtain approximate revenue optimization results using two simple auctions: that of selling the items separately, and that of selling them as a single bundle. Our main results (which are of a "direct sum" variety, and apply to any distributions) are as follows. Selling the items separately guarantees at least half the revenue of the optimal auction; for identically distributed items, this becomes at least 73 of the optimal revenue. For the case of k > 2 items, we show that selling separately guarantees at least a c log2(k) fraction of the optimal revenue; for identically distributed items, the bundling auction yields at least a c log(k) fraction of the optimal revenue. We investigate nonparametric multiproduct pricing problems, in which we want to find revenue maximizing prices for products @math based on a set of customer samples @math . We mostly focus on the unit-demand case, in which products constitute strict substitutes and each customer aims to purchase a single product. In this setting a customer sample consists of a number of nonzero values for different products and possibly an additional product ranking. Once prices are fixed, each customer chooses to buy one of the products she can afford based on some predefined selection rule. We distinguish between the min-buying, max-buying, and rank-buying models. Some of our results also extend to single-minded pricing, in which case products are strict complements and every customer seeks to buy a single set of products, which she purchases if the sum of prices is below her valuation for that set. For the min-buying model we show that the revenue maximization problem is not approximable within factor @math for some constant @math , unless @math , thereby almost closing the gap between the known algorithmic results and previous lower bounds. We also prove inapproximability within @math , @math being an upper bound on the number of nonzero values per customer, and @math under slightly stronger assumptions and provide matching upper bounds. Surprisingly, these hardness results hold even if a price ladder constraint, i.e., a predefined order on the prices of all products, is given. Without the price ladder constraint we obtain similar hardness results for the special case of uniform valuations, i.e., the case that every customer has identical values for all the products she is interested in, assuming specific hardness of the balanced bipartite independent set problem in constant degree graphs or hardness of refuting random 3CNF formulas. Introducing a slightly more general problem definition in which customers are given as an explicit probability distribution, we obtain inapproximability within @math assuming @math . These results apply to single-minded pricing as well. For the max-buying model a polynomial-time approximation scheme exists if a price ladder is given. We give a matching lower bound by proving strong NP-hardness. Assuming limited product supply, we analyze a generic local search algorithm and prove that it is 2-approximate. Finally, we discuss implications for the rank-buying model. We consider the item pricing problem for revenue maximization, where a single seller with multiple distinct items caters to multiple buyers with unknown subadditive valuation functions who arrive in a sequence. The seller sets the prices on individual items, and we design randomized pricing strategies to maximize expected revenue. We consider dynamic uniform strategies, which can change the price upon the arrival of each buyer but the price on all unsold items is the same at all times, and static nonuniform strategies, which can assign different prices to different items but can never change it after setting it initially. We design pricing strategies that guarantee poly-logarithmic (in number of items) approximation to maximum possible social welfare, which is an upper bound on revenue. We also show that any static uniform pricing strategy cannot yield such approximation, thus highlighting a large gap between the powers of dynamic and static pricing. Finally, our pricing strategies imply poly-logarithmic ... We consider the problem of maximizing revenue in prior-free auctions for general single parameter settings. The setting is modeled by an arbitrary downward-closed set system, which captures many special cases such as single item, digital goods and single-minded combinatorial auctions. We relax the truthfulness requirement by the solution concept of Nash equilibria. Implementation by Nash equilibria is a natural and relevant framework in many applications of computer science, where auctions are run repeatedly and bidders can observe others’ strategies, but the auctioneer needs to design a mechanism in advance and cannot use any information on the bidders’ private valuations. We introduce a worst-case revenue benchmark which generalizes the second price of single item auction and the F2 benchmark, introduced by , for digital goods. We design a mechanism whose Nash equilibria obtains at least a constant factor of this benchmark and prove that no truthful mechanisms can achieve a constant approximation. We study the revenue maximization problem of a seller with n heterogeneous items for sale to a single buyer whose valuation function for sets of items is unknown and drawn from some distribution D. We show that if D is a distribution over subadditive valuations with independent items, then the better of pricing each item separately or pricing only the grand bundle achieves a constant-factor approximation to the revenue of the optimal mechanism. This includes buyers who are k-demand, additive up to a matroid constraint, or additive up to constraints of any downwards-closed set system (and whose values for the individual items are sampled independently), as well as buyers who are fractionally subadditive with item multipliers drawn independently. Our proof makes use of the core-tail decomposition framework developed in prior work showing similar results for the significantly simpler class of additive buyers [LY13, BILW14]. In the second part of the paper, we develop a connection between approximately optimal simple mechanisms and approximate revenue monotonicity with respect to buyers' valuations. Revenue non-monotonicity is the phenomenon that sometimes strictly increasing buyers' values for every set can strictly decrease the revenue of the optimal mechanism [HR12]. Using our main result, we derive a bound on how bad this degradation can be (and dub such a bound a proof of approximate revenue monotonicity); we further show that better bounds on approximate monotonicity imply a better analysis of our simple mechanisms. We study the optimal pricing for revenue maximization over social networks in the presence of positive network externalities. In our model, the value of a digital good for a buyer is a function of the set of buyers who have already bought the item. In this setting, a decision to buy an item depends on its price and also on the set of other buyers that have already owned that item. The revenue maximization problem in the context of social networks has been studied by Hartline, Mirrokni, and Sundararajan [4], following the previous line of research on optimal viral marketing over social networks [5,6,7]. We consider the Bayesian setting in which there are some prior knowledge of the probability distribution on the valuations of buyers. In particular, we study two iterative pricing models in which a seller iteratively posts a new price for a digital good (visible to all buyers). In one model, re-pricing of the items are only allowed at a limited rate. For this case, we give a FPTAS for the optimal pricing strategy in the general case. In the second model, we allow very frequent re-pricing of the items. We show that the revenue maximization problem in this case is inapproximable even for simple deterministic valuation functions. In the light of this hardness result, we present constant and logarithmic approximation algorithms when the individual distributions are identical. We consider the problem of designing revenue-maximizing online posted-price mechanisms when the seller has limited supply. A seller has k identical items for sale and is facing n potential buyers (“agents”) that are arriving sequentially. Each agent is interested in buying one item. Each agent’s value for an item is an independent sample from some fixed (but unknown) distribution with support [0,1]. The seller offers a take-it-or-leave-it price to each arriving agent (possibly different for different agents), and aims to maximize his expected revenue. We focus on mechanisms that do not use any information about the distribution; such mechanisms are called detail-free (or prior-independent). They are desirable because knowing the distribution is unrealistic in many practical scenarios. We study how the revenue of such mechanisms compares to the revenue of the optimal offline mechanism that knows the distribution (“offline benchmark”). We present a detail-free online posted-price mechanism whose revenue is at most O((k log n)2 3) less than the offline benchmark, for every distribution that is regular. In fact, this guarantee holds without any assumptions if the benchmark is relaxed to fixed-price mechanisms. Further, we prove a matching lower bound. The performance guarantee for the same mechanism can be improved to O(√k log n), with a distribution-dependent constant, if the ratio k n is sufficiently small. We show that, in the worst case over all demand distributions, this is essentially the best rate that can be obtained with a distribution-specific constant. On a technical level, we exploit the connection to multiarmed bandits (MAB). While dynamic pricing with unlimited supply can easily be seen as an MAB problem, the intuition behind MAB approaches breaks when applied to the setting with limited supply. Our high-level conceptual contribution is that even the limited supply setting can be fruitfully treated as a bandit problem. We consider the problem of dividing indivisible goods fairly among n agents who have additive and submodular valuations for the goods. Our fairness guarantees are in terms of the maximin share, that is defined to be the maximum value that an agent can ensure for herself, if she were to partition the goods into n bundles, and then receive a minimum valued bundle. Since maximin fair allocations (i.e., allocations in which each agent gets at least her maximin share) do not always exist, prior work has focussed on approximation results that aim to find allocations in which the value of the bundle allocated to each agent is (multiplicatively) as close to her maximin share as possible. In particular, Procaccia and Wang (2014) along with (2015) have shown that under additive valuations a 2 3-approximate maximin fair allocation always exists and can be found in polynomial time. We complement these results by developing a simple and efficient algorithm that achieves the same approximation guarantee. Furthermore, we initiate the study of approximate maximin fair division under submodular valuations. Specifically, we show that when the valuations of the agents are nonnegative, monotone, and submodular, then a 1 10-approximate maximin fair allocation is guaranteed to exist. In fact, we show that such an allocation can be efficiently found by using a simple round-robin algorithm. A technical contribution of the paper is to analyze the performance of this combinatorial algorithm by employing the concept of multilinear extensions. We consider the problem of designing a revenue-maximizing auction for a single item, when the values of the bidders are drawn from a correlated distribution. We observe that there exists an algorithm that finds the optimal randomized mechanism that runs in time polynomial in the size of the support. We leverage this result to show that in the oracle model introduced by Ronen and Saberi [FOCS'02], there exists a polynomial time truthful in expectation mechanism that provides a (1.5+e)-approximation to the revenue achievable by an optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanism, and a polynomial time deterministic truthful mechanism that guarantees 5 3 approximation to the revenue achievable by an optimal deterministic truthful mechanism. We show that the 5 3-approximation mechanism provides the same approximation ratio also with respect to the optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanism. This shows that the performance gap between truthful-in-expectation and deterministic mechanisms is relatively small. En route, we solve an open question of Mehta and Vazirani [EC'04]. Finally, we extend some of our results to the multi-item case, and show how to compute the optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanisms for bidders with more complex valuations. We study the problem of fair allocation for indivisible goods. We use the the maxmin share paradigm introduced by Budish as a measure for fairness. Procacciafirst (EC'14) were first to investigate this fundamental problem in the additive setting. In contrast to what real-world experiments suggest, they show that a maxmin guarantee (1- @math allocation) is not always possible even when the number of agents is limited to 3. While the existence of an approximation solution (e.g. a @math - @math allocation) is quite straightforward, improving the guarantee becomes subtler for larger constants. Procaccia provide a proof for existence of a @math - @math allocation and leave the question open for better guarantees. Our main contribution is an answer to the above question. We improve the result of ! to a @math factor in the additive setting. The main idea for our @math - @math allocation method is clustering the agents. To this end, we introduce three notions and techniques, namely reducibility, matching allocation, and cycle-envy-freeness, and prove the approximation guarantee of our algorithm via non-trivial applications of these techniques. Our analysis involves coloring and double counting arguments that might be of independent interest. One major shortcoming of the current studies on fair allocation is the additivity assumption on the valuations. We alleviate this by extending our results to the case of submodular, fractionally subadditive, and subadditive settings. More precisely, we give constant approximation guarantees for submodular and XOS agents, and a logarithmic approximation for the case of subadditive agents. Furthermore, we complement our results by providing close upper bounds for each class of valuation functions. Finally, we present algorithms to find such allocations for additive, submodular, and XOS settings in polynomial time. Revenue maximization in multi-item settings is notoriously elusive. This paper studies a class of two-item auctions which we call a mixed-bundling auction with reserve prices (MBARP). It calls VCG on an enlarged set of agents by adding the seller---who has reserve valuations for each bundle of items---and a fake agent who receives nothing nor has valuations for any item or bundle, but has a valuation for pure bundling allocations, i.e., allocations where the two items are allocated to a single agent. This is a strict subclass of several known classes of auctions, including the affine maximizer auction (AMA), λ-aution, and the virtual valuations combinatorial auction (VVCA). As we show, a striking feature of MBARP is that its revenue can be represented in a simple closed form as a function of the parameters. Thus, we can solve first-order conditions on the parameters and obtain the optimal MBARP. The optimal MBARP yields significantly higher revenue than prior auctions for which the revenue-maximizing parameters could be solved for in closed form: separate Myerson auctions, pure-bundling Myerson auction, VCG, and mixed-bundling auction without reserve prices. Its revenue even exceeds that obtained via simulation within broader classes: VVCA and AMA. In this paper, we introduce a novel approach for reducing the k-item n-bidder auction with additive valuation to k-item 1-bidder auctions. This approach, called the Best-Guess reduction, can be applied to address several central questions in optimal revenue auction theory such as the relative strength of simple versus complex mechanisms, the power of randomization, and Bayesian versus dominant-strategy implementations. First, when the items have independent valuation distributions, we present a deterministic mechanism called Deterministic Best-Guess that yields at least a constant fraction of the optimal revenue by any randomized mechanism. This also gives the first simple mechanism that achieves constant fraction optimal revenue for such multi-buyer multi-item auctions. Second, if all the nk valuation random variables are independent, the optimal revenue achievable in dominant strategy incentive compatibility (DSIC) is shown to be at least a constant fraction of that achievable in Bayesian incentive compatibility (BIC). Third, when all the nk values are identically distributed according to a common one-dimensional distribution F, the optimal revenue is shown to be expressible in the closed form Θ(k(r + ∫0mr(1 − F(x)n)dx)) where r = supx≥0 x(1 − F(x)n) and m = lk nr; this revenue is achievable by a simple mechanism called 2nd-Price Bundling. All our results apply to arbitrary distributions, regular or irregular. We present approximation and online algorithms for a number of problems of pricing items for sale so as to maximize seller's revenue in an unlimited supply setting. Our first result is an O(k)-approximation algorithm for pricing items to single-minded bidders who each want at most k items. This improves over recent independent work of Briest and Krysta [5] who achieve an O(k2) bound. For the case k = 2, where we obtain a 4-approximation, this can be viewed as the following graph vertex pricing problem: given a (multi) graph G with valuations we on the edges, find prices pi ≥ 0 for the vertices to maximize Σ (pi + pj). e=(i,j):we ≥ pi + pj.We also improve the approximation of [11] from O(log m + log n) to O(log n), where m is the number of bidders and n is the number of items, for the "highway problem" in which all desired subsets are intervals on a line.Our approximation algorithms can be fed into the generic reduction of [2] to yield an incentive-compatible auction with nearly the same performance guarantees so long as the number of bidders is sufficiently large. In addition, we show how our algorithms can be combined with results of Blum and Hartline [3], [4], and Kalai and Vempala [13] to achieve good performance in the online setting, where customers arrive one at a time and each must be presented a set of item prices based only on knowledge of the customers seen so far. We study the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods to a set of people from an algorithmic perspective. fair division has been a central topic in the economic literature and several concepts of fairness have been suggested. The criterion that we focus on is envy-freeness. In our model, a monotone utility function is associated with every player specifying the value of each subset of the goods for the player. An allocation is envy-free if every player prefers her own share than the share of any other player. When the goods are divisible, envy-free allocations always exist. In the presence of indivisibilities, we show that there exist allocations in which the envy is bounded by the maximum marginal utility, and present a simple algorithm for computing such allocations. We then look at the optimization problem of finding an allocation with minimum possible envy. In the general case the problem is not solvable or approximable in polynomial time unless P = NP. We consider natural special cases (e.g.additive utilities) which are closely related to a class of job scheduling problems. Approximation algorithms as well as inapproximability results are obtained. Finally we investigate the problem of designing truthful mechanisms for producing allocations with bounded envy. We consider the problem of a monopolist seller who wants to sell some items to a set of buyers. The buyers are strategic, unit-demand, and connected by a social network. Furthermore, the utility of a buyer is a decreasing function of the number of neighbors who do not own the item. In other words, they exhibit negative externalities, deriving utility from being unique in their purchases. In this model, any fixed setting of the price induces a sub-game on the buyers. We show that it is an exact potential game which admits multiple pure Nash Equilibria. A natural problem is to compute those pure Nash equilibria that raise the most and least revenue for the seller. These correspond respectively to the most optimistic and most pessimistic revenues that can be raised. We show that the revenues of both the best and worst equilibria are hard to approximate within sub-polynomial factors. Given this hardness, we consider a relaxed notion of pricing, where the price for the same item can vary within a constant factor for different buyers. We show a 4-approximation to the pessimistic revenue when the prices are relaxed by a factor of 4. The interesting aspect of this algorithm is that it uses a linear programming relaxation that only encodes part of the strategic behavior of the buyers in its constraints, and rounds this relaxation to obtain a starting configuration for performing relaxed Nash dynamics. Finally, for the maximum revenue Nash equilibrium, we show a 2-approximation for bipartite graphs (without price relaxation), and complement this result by showing that the problem is NP-Hard even on trees.