Incentive Ratios of Fisher Markets

  • Ning Chen
  • Xiaotie Deng
  • Hongyang Zhang
  • Jie Zhang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7392)


In a Fisher market, a market maker sells m items to n potential buyers. The buyers submit their utility functions and money endowments to the market maker, who, upon receiving submitted information, derives market equilibrium prices and allocations of its items. While agents may benefit by misreporting their private information, we show that the percentage of improvement by a unilateral strategic play, called incentive ratio, is rather limited—it is less than 2 for linear markets and at most \(e^{1/e}\thickapprox 1.445\) for Cobb-Douglas markets. We further prove that both ratios are tight.


Utility Function Equilibrium Price Market Equilibrium Market Maker Fisher Market 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adsul, B., Babu, C.S., Garg, J., Mehta, R., Sohoni, M.: Nash Equilibria in Fisher Market. In: Kontogiannis, S., Koutsoupias, E., Spirakis, P.G. (eds.) SAGT 2010. LNCS, vol. 6386, pp. 30–41. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arrow, K., Chenery, H., Minhas, B., Solow, R.: Capital-Labor Substitution and Economic Efficiency. The Review of Economics and Statistics 43(3), 225–250 (1961)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arrow, K., Debreu, G.: Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy. Econometrica 22, 265–290 (1954)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, N., Deng, X., Sun, X., Yao, A.C.-C.: Fisher Equilibrium Price with a Class of Concave Utility Functions. In: Albers, S., Radzik, T. (eds.) ESA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3221, pp. 169–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, N., Deng, X., Zhang, J.: How Profitable Are Strategic Behaviors in a Market? In: Demetrescu, C., Halldórsson, M.M. (eds.) ESA 2011. LNCS, vol. 6942, pp. 106–118. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Codenotti, B., Varadarajan, K.R.: Efficient Computation of Equilibrium Prices for Markets with Leontief Utilities. In: Díaz, J., Karhumäki, J., Lepistö, A., Sannella, D. (eds.) ICALP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3142, pp. 371–382. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deng, X., Papadimitriou, C., Safra, S.: On the Complexity of Equilibria. In: STOC 2002, pp. 67–71 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Devanur, N., Kannan, R.: Market Equilibria in Polynomial Time for Fixed Number of Goods or Agents. In: FOCS 2008, pp. 45–53 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Devanur, N., Papadimitriou, C., Saberi, A., Vazirani, V.: Market Equilibrium via a Primal-Dual Algorithm for a Convex Program. JACM 55(5) (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eaves, B.C.: Finite Solution of Pure Trade Markets with Cobb-Douglas Utilities. Mathematical Programming Study 23, 226–239 (1985)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eisenberg, E., Gale, D.: Consensus of Subjective Probabilities: The Pari-Mutuel Method. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 30, 165–168 (1959)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jain, K.: A polynomial Time Algorithm for Computing an Arrow-Debreu Market Equilibrium for Linear Utilities. SIAM Journal on Computing 37(1), 303–318 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kojima, F., Pathak, P.: Incentives and Stability in Large Two-Sided Matching Markets. American Economic Review 99(3), 608–627 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kothari, A., Parkes, D., Suri, S.: Approximately-Strategyproof and Tractable Multiunit Auctions. Decision Support Systems 39(1), 105–121 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maxfield, R.: General Equilibrium and the Theory of Directed Graphs. Journal of Mathematical Economics 27(1), 23–51 (1997)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T., Tardos, E., Vazirani, V.: Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Orlin, J.: Improved Algorithms for Computing Fisher’s Market Clearing Prices. In: STOC 2010, pp. 291–300 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roberts, D., Postlewaite, A.: The Incentives for Price-Taking Behavior in Large Exchange Economies. Econometrica 44, 113–127 (1976)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schummer, J.: Almost Dominant Strategy Implementation, MEDS Department, Northwestern University, Discussion Papers 1278 (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Solov, R.: A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 70, 65–94 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ye, Y.: A Path to the Arrow-Debreu Competitive Market Equilibrium. Mathematical Programming 111(1-2), 315–348 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ning Chen
    • 1
  • Xiaotie Deng
    • 2
  • Hongyang Zhang
    • 3
  • Jie Zhang
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Mathematical SciencesNanyang Technological UniversitySingapore
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityChina
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceAarhus UniversityDenmark

Personalised recommendations