Skip to main content
Log in

Risk-Free Bidding in Complement-Free Combinatorial Auctions

  • Published:
Theory of Computing Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study risk-free bidding strategies in combinatorial auctions with incomplete information. Specifically, what is the maximum profit that a complement-free (subadditive) bidder can guarantee in a multi-item combinatorial auction? Suppose there are n bidders and Bi is the value that bidder i has for the entire set of items. We study the above problem from the perspective of the first bidder, Bidder 1. In this setting, the worst case profit guarantees arise in a duopsony, that is when n = 2, so this problem then corresponds to playing an auction against a budgeted adversary with budget B2. We present worst-case guarantees for two simple and widely-studied combinatorial auctions; namely, the sequential and simultaneous auctions, for both the first-price and second-price case. In the general case of distinct items, our main results are for the class of fractionally subadditive (XOS) bidders, where we show that for both first-price and second-price sequential auctions Bidder 1 has a strategy that guarantees a profit of at least \((\sqrt {B_{1}}-\sqrt {B_{2}})^{2}\) when B2B1, and this bound is tight. More profitable guarantees can be obtained for simultaneous auctions, where in the first-price case, Bidder 1 has a strategy that guarantees a profit of at least \(\frac {(B_{1}-B_{2})^{2}}{2B_{1}}\), and in the second-price case, a bound of B1B2 is achievable. We also consider the special case of sequential auctions with identical items, for which we provide tight guarantees for bidders with subadditive valuations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This is the standard definition of XOS functions. Fractionally subadditive functions are defined in terms of fractional set covers; the equivalence between fractionally subadditive and XOS functions was shown by [9].

References

  1. Ashenfelter, O.: How auctions work for wine and art. J. Econ. Perspect. 3(3), 23–36 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bae, J., Beigman, E., Berry, R., Honig, M., Vohra, R.: On the efficiency of sequential auctions for spectrum sharing. In: 2009 International Conference on Game Theory for Networks, pp. 199–205 (2009)

  3. Bhawalkar, K., Roughgarden, T.: Welfare guarantees for combinatorial auctions with item bidding. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 700–709 (2011)

  4. Cai, Y., Papadimitriou, C.: Simultaneous bayesian auctions and computational complexity. In: Proceedings of 15th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation (EC), pp. 895–910 (2014)

  5. Chanel, O., Gérard-Varet, L., Vincent, S.: Auction theory and practice; Evidence from the market for jewellery. In: Ginsburgh, V., Menger, P. (eds.) Economics of the Arts: Selected Essays, pp. 135–149. North-Holland (1996)

  6. Christodoulou, G., Kovács, A., Schapira, M.: Bayesian combinatorial auctions. J. ACM 63(2), 11:1–11:19 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Daskalakis, C., Fabrikant, A., Papadimitriou, C.: The game world is flat; the complexity of Nash equilibrium in succinct games. In: Proceedings of 33rd Int. Coll. on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pp. 513–526 (2006)

  8. Etessami, K.: The complexity of computing a (quasi-)perfect equilibrium for an n-player extensive form game of perfect recall. Games Econ. Behav. To appear (2019)

  9. Feige, U.: On maximizing welfare when utility functions are subadditive. SIAM J. Comput. 39(1), 122–142 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Feldman, M., Fu, H., Gravin, N., Lucier, B.: Simultaneous auctions are (almost) efficient. In: Proceedings of 49th Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 201–210 (2013)

  11. Feldman, M., Lucier, B., Syrgkanis, V.: Limits of efficiency in sequential auctions. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Web and Internet Economics (WINE), pp. 160–173 (2013)

  12. Funk, P.: Auctions with interdependent valuations. Int. J. Game Theory 25(1), 51–64 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Gale, I., Stegeman, M.: Sequential auctions of endogenously valued objects. Games Econ. Behav. 36(1), 74–103 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Gallegati, M., Giulioni, G., Kirman, A., Palestrini, A.: What’s that got to do with the price of fish?; Buyer’s behavior on the Ancona fish market. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 80(1), 20–33 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ginsburgh, V., van Ours, J.: On organizing a sequential auction; Results from a natural experiment by Christie’s. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 59(1), 1–15 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hassidim, A., Kaplan, H., Mansour, Y., Nisan, N.: Non-price equilibria in markets of discrete goods. In: Proceedings of 12th Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC), pp. 295–296 (2011)

  17. Jehiel, P., Moldovanu, B.: Strategic nonparticipation. RAND J. Econ. 27(1), 84–98 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jehiel, P., Moldovanu, B., Stacchetti, E.: How (not) to sell nuclear weapons. Am. Econ. Rev. 86(4), 814–29 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lehmann, B., Lehmann, D., Nisan, N.: Combinatorial auctions with decreasing marginal utilities. Games Econ. Behav. 55(2), 270–296 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Milgrom, P., Weber, R.: A theory of auctions and competitive bidding. Econometrica 50, 1089–1122 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Myerson, R.: Optimal auction design. Math. Oper. Res. 6(1), 58–73 (1981)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Narayan, V.V., Prebet, E., Vetta, A.: The declining price anomaly is not universal in multi-buyer sequential auctions (but almost is). In: Fotakis, D., Markakis, E. (eds.) Algorithmic Game Theory, pp. 109–122. Springer International Publishing (2019)

  23. Paes Leme, R., Syrgkanis, V., Tardos, E.: The curse of simultaneity. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS), pp. 60–67 (2012a)

  24. Leme, R.P., Syrgkanis, V., Tardos, É.: Sequential auctions and externalities. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 869–886 (2012b)

  25. Vickrey, W.: Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. J. Financ. 16(1), 8–37 (1961)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Weber, R.: Multiple object auctions. In: Engelbrecht-Wiggans, R., Shubik, M., Stark, R. (eds.) Auctions, Bidding and Contracting: Use and Theory, pp. 165–191. New York University Press (1983)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vishnu V. Narayan.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article belongs to the Topical Collection: Special Issue on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT 2019) Guest Editors: Dimitris Fotakis and Vangelis Markakis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narayan, V.V., Rayaprolu, G. & Vetta, A. Risk-Free Bidding in Complement-Free Combinatorial Auctions. Theory Comput Syst 66, 581–615 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00224-021-10068-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00224-021-10068-3

Keywords

Navigation