Advertisement

The Power of Verification for One-Parameter Agents

  • Vincenzo Auletta
  • Roberto De Prisco
  • Paolo Penna
  • Giuseppe Persiano
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3142)

Abstract

We study combinatorial optimization problems involving one-parameter selfish agents considered by Archer and Tardos [FOCS 2001]. In particular, we show that, if agents can lie in one direction (that is they either overbid or underbid) then any (polynomial-time) c-approximation algorithm, for the optimization problem without selfish agents, can be turned into a (polynomial-time) c(1+ε)-approximation truthful mechanism, for any ε >0. We then look at the Q||C max problem in the case of agents owning machines of different speeds. We consider the model in which payments are given to the agents only after the machines have completed the jobs assigned. This means that for each machine that receives at least one job, the mechanism can verify if the corresponding agent declared a greater speed. For this setting, we characterize the allocation algorithms A that admit a payment function P such that M=(A,P) is a truthful mechanism. In addition, we give a (1+ε)-approximation truthful mechanism for Q||C max when machine speeds are bounded by a constant. Finally, we consider the classical scheduling problem Q|| ∑ w j C j which does not admit an exact mechanism if verification is not allowed. By contrast, we show that an exact mechanism for Q|| ∑ w j C j exists when verification is allowed.

Keywords

Combinatorial Optimization Problem Allocation Algorithm Positive Load Adjustment Phase Weakly Monotone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Archer, A., Tardos, E.: Truthful mechanisms for one-parameter agents. In: Proc. of the IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 482–491 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Auletta, V., De Prisco, R., Penna, P., Persiano, G.: Deterministic truthful approximation mechanisms for scheduling related machines. Technical report, To appear in Proceedings of STACS 2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Auletta, V., De Prisco, R., Penna, P., Persiano, G.: How to tax and route selfish unsplittable traffic. Technical report, To appear in Proceedings of SPAA (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ausiello, G., Crescenzi, P., Gambosi, G., Kann, V., Marchetti-Spaccamela, A., Protasi, M.: Complexity and Approximation: Combinatorial Optimization Problems and their Approximability Properties. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clarke, E.H.: Multipart Pricing of Public Goods. Public Choice, 17–33 (1971)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Groves, T.: Incentive in Teams. Econometrica 41, 617–631 (1973)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hochbaum, D.S., Shmoys, D.B.: Using dual approximation algorithms for scheduling problems: theoretical and practical results. J. of ACM 34, 144–162 (1987)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nisan, N., Ronen, A.: Algorithmic Mechanism Design. In: Proc. of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 129–140 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vickrey, W.: Counterspeculation, Auctions and Competitive Sealed Tenders. Journal of Finance, 8–37 (1961)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vincenzo Auletta
    • 1
  • Roberto De Prisco
    • 1
  • Paolo Penna
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Persiano
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Informatica ed Applicazioni “R.M. Capocelli”Università di SalernoBaronissiItaly

Personalised recommendations