Responsive Lotteries

  • Uriel Feige
  • Moshe Tennenholtz
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6386)

Abstract

Given a set of alternatives and a single player, we introduce the notion of a responsive lottery. These mechanisms receive as input from the player a reported utility function, specifying a value for each one of the alternatives, and use a lottery to produce as output a probability distribution over the alternatives. Thereafter, exactly one alternative wins (is given to the player) with the respective probability. Assuming that the player is not indifferent to which of the alternatives wins, a lottery rule is called truthful dominant if reporting his true utility function (up to affine transformations) is the unique report that maximizes the expected payoff for the player. We design truthful dominant responsive lotteries. We also discuss their relations with scoring rules and with VCG mechanisms.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen, F.: Discovering personal probabilities when utility functions are unknown. Management Science 33(4), 542–544 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dobzinski, S., Nisan, N., Schapira, M.: Truthful randomized mechanisms for combinatorial auctions. In: STOC 2006, pp. 644–652 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gneiting, T., Raftery, A.: Strictly proper scoring rules, prediction, and estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association 102, 359–378 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica XLVII, 263–291 (1979)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M., Green, J.: Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCarthy, J.: Measures of the value of information. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 42, 654–655 (1956)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of games and economic behavior, 3rd edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1954)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T.: Eva Tardos and Vijay Vazirani. Algorithmic Game Theory, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Savage, L.J.: Elicitation of personal probabilities and expectations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 66, 783–801 (1971)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uriel Feige
    • 1
  • Moshe Tennenholtz
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Applied MathematicsWeizmann InstituteRehovotIsrael
  2. 2.Microsoft R&D CenterHerzeliaIsrael
  3. 3.Faculty of Industrial Engineering and ManagementTechnionHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations