Items shared through Social Media may affect more than one user's privacy—e.g., photos that depict multiple users, comments that mention multiple users, events in which multiple users are invited, etc. The lack of multi-party privacy management support in current mainstream Social Media infrastructures makes users unable to appropriately control to whom these items are actually shared or not. Computational mechanisms that are able to merge the privacy preferences of multiple users into a single policy for an item can help solve this problem. However, merging multiple users’ privacy preferences is not an easy task, because privacy preferences may conflict, so methods to resolve conflicts are needed. Moreover, these methods need to consider how users’ would actually reach an agreement about a solution to the conflict in order to propose solutions that can be acceptable by all of the users affected by the item to be shared. Current approaches are either too demanding or only consider fixed ways of aggregating privacy preferences. In this paper, we propose the first computational mechanism to resolve conflicts for multi-party privacy management in Social Media that is able to adapt to different situations by modelling the concessions that users make to reach a solution to the conflicts. We also present results of a user study in which our proposed mechanism outperformed other existing approaches in terms of how many times each approach matched users’ behaviour.
The work described in @cite_40 is based on an incentive mechanism where users are rewarded with a quantity of numeraire each time they share information or acknowledge the presence of other users (called co-owners) who are affected by the same item. When there are conflicts among co-owners' policies, users can spend their numeraire bidding for the policy that is best for them. Then, the use of the Clark Tax mechanism is suggested to obtain the highest bid. As stated in @cite_27 , users may have difficulties to comprehend the mechanism and specify appropriate bid values in auctions. Furthermore, users that earned much numeraire in the past will have more numeraire to spend it at will, potentially leading to unilateral decisions.
@cite_27 @cite_40
1495768673 2084685902
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 revisit the classic problem of fair division from a mechanism design perspective and provide an elegant truthful mechanism that yields surprisingly good approximation guarantees for the widely used solution of Proportional Fairness. This solution, which is closely related to Nash bargaining and the competitive equilibrium, is known to be not implementable in a truthful fashion, which has been its main drawback. To alleviate this issue, we propose a new mechanism, which we call the Partial Allocation mechanism, that discards a carefully chosen fraction of the allocated resources in order to incentivize the agents to be truthful in reporting their valuations. This mechanism introduces a way to implement interesting truthful outcomes in settings where monetary payments are not an option. For a multi-dimensional domain with an arbitrary number of agents and items, and for the very large class of homogeneous valuation functions, we prove that our mechanism provides every agent with at least a 1 e ≈ 0.368 fraction of her Proportionally Fair valuation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first result that gives a constant factor approximation to every agent for the Proportionally Fair solution. To complement this result, we show that no truthful mechanism can guarantee more than 0.5 approximation, even for the restricted class of additive linear valuations. In addition to this, we uncover a connection between the Partial Allocation mechanism and VCG-based mechanism design. We also ask whether better approximation ratios are possible in more restricted settings. In particular, motivated by the massive privatization auction in the Czech republic in the early 90s we provide another mechanism for additive linear valuations that works really well when all the items are highly demanded.