We study black-box reductions from mechanism design to algorithm design for welfare maximization in settings of incomplete information. Given oracle access to an algorithm for an underlying optimization problem, the goal is to simulate an incentive compatible mechanism. The mechanism will be evaluated on its expected welfare, relative to the algorithm provided, and its complexity is measured by the time (and queries) needed to simulate the mechanism on any input. While it is known that black-box reductions are not possible in many prior-free settings, settings with priors appear more promising: there are known reductions for Bayesian incentive compatible (BIC) mechanism design for general classes of welfare maximization problems. This dichotomy begs the question: which mechanism design problems admit black-box reductions, and which do not? Our main result is that black-box mechanism design is impossible under two of the simplest settings not captured by known positive results. First, for the problem of allocating @math goods to a single buyer whose valuation is additive and independent across the goods, subject to a downward-closed constraint on feasible allocations, we show that there is no polytime (in @math ) BIC black-box reduction for expected welfare maximization. Second, for the setting of multiple single-parameter agents---where polytime BIC reductions are known---we show that no polytime reductions exist when the incentive requirement is tightened to Max-In-Distributional-Range. In each case, we show that achieving a sub-polynomial approximation to the expected welfare requires exponentially many queries, even when the set of feasible allocations is known to be downward-closed.
As described above, BIC black-box reductions are known for a rich class of welfare maximization problems @cite_14 @cite_5 @cite_10 @cite_0 . In the prior-free setting, Babaioff, Lavi, and Pavlov also show that for a class of single-minded combinatorial auction problems, one can achieve DSIC in a black-box way by losing a factor that is logarithmic in the ratio between the largest and smallest possible agent values @cite_13 . Dughmi and Roughgarden show a black-box reduction for FPTAS algorithms that also applies in a broad range of multi-dimensional welfare maximization problems @cite_3 . There is also a significant line of work studying general methods for converting certain types of algorithms into IC mechanisms @cite_8 @cite_7 .
@cite_13 @cite_14 @cite_7 @cite_8 @cite_3 @cite_0 @cite_5 @cite_10
2142270691 2112139342 2103751307 1982492546 2139692878 2079025269
In this article, we are interested in general techniques for designing mechanisms that approximate the social welfare in the presence of selfish rational behavior. We demonstrate our results in the setting of Combinatorial Auctions (CA). Our first result is a general deterministic technique to decouple the algorithmic allocation problem from the strategic aspects, by a procedure that converts any algorithm to a dominant-strategy ascending mechanism. This technique works for any single value domain, in which each agent has the same value for each desired outcome, and this value is the only private information. In particular, for “single-value CAs”, where each player desires any one of several different bundles but has the same value for each of them, our technique converts any approximation algorithm to a dominant strategy mechanism that almost preserves the original approximation ratio. Our second result provides the first computationally efficient deterministic mechanism for the case of single-value multi-minded bidders (with private value and private desired bundles). The mechanism achieves an approximation to the social welfare which is close to the best possible in polynomial time (unless PeNP). This mechanism is an algorithmic implementation in undominated strategies, a notion that we define and justify, and is of independent interest. The optimal allocation of resources in complex environments—like allocation of dynamic wireless spectrum, cloud computing services, and Internet advertising—is computationally challenging even given the true preferences of the participants. In the theory and practice of optimization in complex environments, a wide variety of special and general purpose algorithms have been developed; these algorithms produce outcomes that are satisfactory but not generally optimal or incentive compatible. This paper develops a very simple approach for converting any, potentially non-optimal, algorithm for optimization given the true participant preferences, into a Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism that weakly improves social welfare and revenue. (JEL D82, H82, L82) We give a general technique to obtain approximation mechanisms that are truthful in expectation. We show that for packing domains, any spl alpha -approximation algorithm that also bounds the integrality gap of the IF relaxation of the problem by a can be used to construct an spl alpha -approximation mechanism that is truthful in expectation. This immediately yields a variety of new and significantly improved results for various problem domains and furthermore, yields truthful (in expectation) mechanisms with guarantees that match the best known approximation guarantees when truthfulness is not required. In particular, we obtain the first truthful mechanisms with approximation guarantees for a variety of multi-parameter domains. We obtain truthful (in expectation) mechanisms achieving approximation guarantees of O( spl radic m) for combinatorial auctions (CAs), (1 + spl epsi ) for multiunit CAs with B = spl Omega (log m) copies of each item, and 2 for multiparameter knapsack problems (multiunit auctions). Our construction is based on considering an LP relaxation of the problem and using the classic VCG mechanism by W. Vickrey (1961), E. Clarke (1971) and T. Groves (1973) to obtain a truthful mechanism in this fractional domain. We argue that the (fractional) optimal solution scaled down by a, where a is the integrality gap of the problem, can be represented as a convex combination of integer solutions, and by viewing this convex combination as specifying a probability distribution over integer solutions, we get a randomized, truthful in expectation mechanism. Our construction can be seen as a way of exploiting VCG in a computational tractable way even when the underlying social-welfare maximization problem is NP-hard. This paper deals with the design of efficiently computable incentive compatible, or truthful, mechanisms for combinatorial optimization problems with multi-parameter agents. We focus on approximation algorithms for NP-hard mechanism design problems. These algorithms need to satisfy certain monotonicity properties to ensure truthfulness. Since most of the known approximation techniques do not fulfill these properties, we study alternative techniques.Our first contribution is a quite general method to transform a pseudopolynomial algorithm into a monotone FPTAS. This can be applied to various problems like, e.g., knapsack, constrained shortest path, or job scheduling with deadlines. For example, the monotone FPTAS for the knapsack problem gives a very efficient, truthful mechanism for single-minded multi-unit auctions. The best previous result for such auctions was a 2-approximation. In addition, we present a monotone PTAS for the generalized assignment problem with any bounded number of parameters per agent.The most efficient way to solve packing integer programs (PIPs) is LP-based randomized rounding, which also is in general not monotone. We show that primal-dual greedy algorithms achieve almost the same approximation ratios for PIPs as randomized rounding. The advantage is that these algorithms are inherently monotone. This way, we can significantly improve the approximation ratios of truthful mechanisms for various fundamental mechanism design problems like single-minded combinatorial auctions (CAs), unsplittable flow routing and multicast routing. Our approximation algorithms can also be used for the winner determination in CAs with general bidders specifying their bids through an oracle. We give the first black-box reduction from approximation algorithms to truthful approximation mechanisms for a non-trivial class of multi-parameter problems. Specifically, we prove that every welfare-maximization problem that admits a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme (FPTAS) and can be encoded as a packing problem also admits a truthful-in-expectation randomized mechanism that is an FPTAS. Our reduction makes novel use of smoothed analysis by employing small perturbations as a tool in algorithmic mechanism design. We develop a “duality” between linear perturbations of the objective function of an optimization problem and of its feasible set, and we use the “primal” and “dual” viewpoints to prove the running time bound and the truthfulness guarantee, respectively, for our mechanism. Optimally allocating cellphone spectrum, advertisements on the Internet, and landing slots at airports is computationally intractable. When the participants may strategize, not only must the optimizer deal with complex feasibility constraints but also with complex incentive constraints. We give a very simple method for constructing a Bayesian incentive compatible mechanism from any, potentially non-optimal, algorithm that maps agents' reports to an allocation. The expected welfare of the mechanism is, approximately, at least that of the algorithm on the agents' true preferences.