We compare the expected efficiency of revenue maximizing (or optimal ) mechanisms with that of efficiency maximizing ones. We show that the efficiency of the revenue maximizing mechanism for selling a single item with k + log_ e (e-1) k + 1 bidders is at least as much as the efficiency of the efficiency maximizing mechanism with k bidders, when bidder valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a Monotone Hazard Rate distribution. Surprisingly, we also show that this bound is tight within a small additive constant of 5.7. In other words, Theta(log k) extra bidders suffice for the revenue maximizing mechanism to match the efficiency of the efficiency maximizing mechanism, while o(log k) do not. This is in contrast to the result of Bulow and Klemperer comparing the revenue of the two mechanisms, where only one extra bidder suffices. More precisely, they show that the revenue of the efficiency maximizing mechanism with k+1 bidders is no less than the revenue of the revenue maximizing mechanism with k bidders. We extend our result for the case of selling t identical items and show that 2.2 log k + t Theta(log log k) extra bidders suffice for the revenue maximizing mechanism to match the efficiency of the efficiency maximizing mechanism. In order to prove our results, we do a classification of Monotone Hazard Rate (MHR) distributions and identify a family of MHR distributions, such that for each class in our classification, there is a member of this family that is pointwise lower than every distribution in that class. This lets us prove interesting structural theorems about distributions with Monotone Hazard Rate.
Bulow and Klemperer @cite_5 characterized the revenue sub-optimality of @math . They showed that @math (with one extra bidder) has at least as much expected revenue as @math . Their result can be interpreted in a bi-criteria sense; VCG auctions with one extra bidder simultaneously maximize both revenue and efficiency. For the case of @math identical items, they show that @math additional bidders are needed for the result to hold.
@cite_5
1718157382 203000141 1495768673 2169604085
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. The VCG mechanism is the gold standard for combinatorial auctions (CAs), and it maximizes social welfare. In contrast, the revenue-maximizing (aka optimal) CA is unknown, and designing one is NP-hard. Therefore, research on optimal CAs has progressed into special settings. Notably, Levin [1997] derived the optimal CA for complements when each agent's private type is one-dimensional. (This does not fall inside the well-studied "single-parameter environment".) We introduce a new research avenue for increasing revenue where we poke holes in the allocation space--based on the bids--and then use a welfare-maximizing allocation rule within the remaining allocation set. In this paper, the first step down this avenue, we introduce a new form of "reserve pricing" into CAs. We show that Levin's optimal revenue can be 2-approximated by using "monopoly reserve prices" to curtail the allocation set, followed by welfare-maximizing allocation and Levin's payment rule. A key lemma of potential independent interest is that the expected revenue from any truthful allocation-monotonic mechanism equals the expected virtual valuation; this generalizes Myerson's lemma [1981] from the single-parameter environment. Our mechanism is close to the gold standard and thus easier to adopt than Levin's. It also requires less information about the prior over the bidders' types, and is always more efficient. Finally, we show that the optimal revenue can be 6- approximated even if the "reserve pricing" is required to be symmetric across bidders. 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. 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.