×

Budget-feasible mechanism design for non-monotone submodular objectives: offline and online. (English) Zbl 1498.91101

Summary: The framework of budget-feasible mechanism design studies procurement auctions where the auctioneer (buyer) aims to maximize his valuation function subject to a hard budget constraint. We study the problem of designing truthful mechanisms that have good approximation guarantees and never pay the participating agents (sellers) more than the budget. We focus on the case of general (non-monotone) submodular valuation functions and derive the first truthful, budget-feasible, and \(O(1)\)-approximation mechanisms that run in polynomial time in the value query model, for both offline and online auctions. Prior to our work, the only \(O(1)\)-approximation mechanism known for non-monotone submodular objectives required an exponential number of value queries. At the heart of our approach lies a novel greedy algorithm for non-monotone submodular maximization under a knapsack constraint. Our algorithm builds two candidate solutions simultaneously (to achieve a good approximation), yet ensures that agents cannot jump from one solution to the other (to implicitly enforce truthfulness). The fact that in our mechanism the agents are not ordered according to their marginal value per cost allows us to appropriately adapt these ideas to the online setting as well. To further illustrate the applicability of our approach, we also consider the case where additional feasibility constraints are present, for example, at most \(k\) agents can be selected. We obtain \(O(p)\)-approximation mechanisms for both monotone and non-monotone submodular objectives, when the feasible solutions are independent sets of a \(p\)-system. With the exception of additive valuation functions, no mechanisms were known for this setting prior to our work. Finally, we provide lower bounds suggesting that, when one cares about nontrivial approximation guarantees in polynomial time, our results are, asymptotically, the best possible.

MSC:

91B03 Mechanism design theory
91B26 Auctions, bargaining, bidding and selling, and other market models

References:

[1] [1] Amanatidis G, Birmpas G, Markakis E (2016) Coverage, matching, and beyond: New results on budgeted mechanism design. Proc. 12th Internat. Conf. Web Internet Econom. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10123 (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 414-428.Google Scholar · Zbl 1406.91153
[2] [2] Amanatidis G, Birmpas G, Markakis E (2017) On budget-feasible mechanism design for symmetric submodular objectives. Proc. 13th Internat. Conf. Web Internet Econom. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10660 (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 1-15.Google Scholar · Zbl 1405.91221
[3] [3] Amanatidis G, Kleer P, Schäfer G (2019) Budget-feasible mechanism design for non-monotone submodular objectives: Offline and online. Proc. 2019 ACM Conf. Econom. Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 901-919.Google Scholar
[4] [4] Amanatidis G, Fusco F, Lazos P, Leonardi S, Reiffenhäuser R (2020) Fast adaptive non-monotone submodular maximization subject to a knapsack constraint. Proc. Annual Conf. Neural Inform. Processing Systems. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33.Google Scholar
[5] [5] Anari N, Goel G, Nikzad A (2014) Mechanism design for crowdsourcing: An optimal 1-1/e competitive budget-feasible mechanism for large markets. Proc. 55th IEEE Annual Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Piscataway, NJ), 266-275.Google Scholar
[6] [6] Azar PD, Kleinberg R, Weinberg SM (2014) Prophet inequalities with limited information. Proc. 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia), 1358-1377.Google Scholar · Zbl 1422.91162
[7] [7] Babaioff M, Immorlica N, Kempe D, Kleinberg R (2007) A knapsack secretary problem with applications. Proc. 10th Internat. Workshop Approximation and 11th Internat. Workshop Randomization Combin. Optim. Algorithms Techniques. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4627 (Springer, Berlin), 16-28.Google Scholar · Zbl 1171.90417
[8] [8] Badanidiyuru A, Vondrák J (2014) Fast algorithms for maximizing submodular functions. Proc. 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia), 1497-1514.Google Scholar · Zbl 1422.68286
[9] [9] Badanidiyuru A, Kleinberg R, Singer Y (2012) Learning on a budget: Posted price mechanisms for online procurement. Proc. 13th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 128-145.Google Scholar
[10] [10] Balkanski E, Hartline JD (2016) Bayesian budget feasibility with posted pricing. Proc. 25th Internat. Conf. World Wide Web (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 189-203.Google Scholar
[11] [11] Bateni M, Hajiaghayi MT, Zadimoghaddam M (2013) Submodular secretary problem and extensions. ACM Trans. Algorithms 9(4):32.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1301.91016 · doi:10.1145/2500121
[12] [12] Bei X, Chen N, Gravin N, Lu P (2012) Budget feasible mechanism design: From prior-free to Bayesian. Proc. 44th Sympos. Theory Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 449-458.Google Scholar · Zbl 1286.91051
[13] [13] Bei X, Chen N, Gravin N, Lu P (2017) Worst-case mechanism design via Bayesian analysis. SIAM J. Comput. 46(4):1428-1448.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1378.91093 · doi:10.1137/16M1067275
[14] [14] Blumrosen L, Nisan N (2009) On the computational power of demand queries. SIAM J. Comput. 39(4):1372-1391.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1193.91027 · doi:10.1137/050641181
[15] [15] Borodin A, Filmus Y, Oren J (2010) Threshold models for competitive influence in social networks. Proc. Sixth Internat. Workshop Internet Network Econom. (Springer, Berlin), 539-550.Google Scholar
[16] [16] Buchbinder N, Feldman M (2018) Deterministic algorithms for submodular maximization problems. ACM Trans. Algorithms 14(3):32.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1454.68170 · doi:10.1145/3184990
[17] [17] Buchbinder N, Feldman M, Naor J, Schwartz R (2014) Submodular maximization with cardinality constraints. Proc. 25th Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia), 1433-1452.Google Scholar · Zbl 1423.90212
[18] [18] Chekuri C, Gupta S, Quanrud K (2015) Streaming algorithms for submodular function maximization. Proc. 42nd Internat. Colloquium Automata, Languages, Programming, Part I. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9134 (Springer, Berlin), 318-330.Google Scholar · Zbl 1409.68340
[19] [19] Chekuri C, Vondrák J, Zenklusen R (2014) Submodular function maximization via the multilinear relaxation and contention resolution schemes. SIAM J. Comput. 43(6):1831-1879.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1437.90135 · doi:10.1137/110839655
[20] [20] Chen N, Gravin N, Lu P (2011) On the approximability of budget feasible mechanisms. Proc. 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia), 685-699.Google Scholar · Zbl 1377.90113
[21] [21] Dobzinski S, Papadimitriou CH, Singer Y (2011) Mechanisms for complement-free procurement. Proc. 12th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 273-282.Google Scholar
[22] [22] Dynkin EB (1963) Optimal choice of the stopping moment of a Markov process. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 150(2):238-240.Google Scholar
[23] [23] Ene A, Nguyen HL (2019) A nearly-linear time algorithm for submodular maximization with a knapsack constraint. Proc. 46th Internat. Colloquium Automata, Languages, Programming. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 132 (Schloss Dagstuhl—Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany), 53:1-53:12.Google Scholar · Zbl 07561546
[24] [24] Feige U, Mirrokni VS, Vondrák J (2011) Maximizing non-monotone submodular functions. SIAM J. Comput. 40(4):1133-1153.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1230.90198 · doi:10.1137/090779346
[25] [25] Feldman M, Zenklusen R (2018) The submodular secretary problem goes linear. SIAM J. Comput. 47(2):330-366.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1390.68769 · doi:10.1137/16M1105220
[26] [26] Feldman M, Harshaw C, Karbasi A (2017) Greed is good: Near-optimal submodular maximization via greedy optimization. Proc. 30th Conf. Learning Theory. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, vol. 65, 758-784.Google Scholar
[27] [27] Feldman M, Naor J, Schwartz R (2011a) Improved competitive ratios for submodular secretary problems (extended abstract). Goldberg LA, Jansen K, Ravi R, Rolim JDP, eds. Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6845 (Springer, Berlin), 218-229.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1343.90077 · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22935-0_19
[28] [28] Feldman M, Naor J, Schwartz R (2011b) A unified continuous greedy algorithm for submodular maximization. Proc. IEEE 52nd Annual Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC), 570-579.Google Scholar · Zbl 1292.90248
[29] [29] Goel G, Nikzad A, Singla A (2014) Mechanism design for crowdsourcing markets with heterogeneous tasks. Proc. Second AAAI Conf. Human Comput. Crowdsourcing (Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park, CA).Google Scholar
[30] [30] Gravin N, Jin Y, Lu P, Zhang C (2019) Optimal budget-feasible mechanisms for additive valuations. Proc. 2019 ACM Conf. Economics and Comput. (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 887-900.Google Scholar
[31] [31] Gupta A, Nagarajan V, Singla S (2017) Adaptivity gaps for stochastic probing: Submodular and XOS functions. Proc. 28th Annual ACM-SIAM Sympos. Discrete Algorithms (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia), 1688-1702.Google Scholar · Zbl 1423.90159
[32] [32] Gupta A, Roth A, Schoenebeck G, Talwar K (2010) Constrained non-monotone submodular maximization: Offline and secretary algorithms. Saberi A, ed. Proc. Sixth Internat. Workshop Internet Network Econom. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6484 (Springer, Berlin), 246-257.Google Scholar
[33] [33] Horel T, Ioannidis S, Muthukrishnan S (2014) Budget feasible mechanisms for experimental design. Pardo A, Viola A, eds. Proc. 11th Latin Amer. Sympos. Theoret. Inform. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8392 (Springer, Berlin), 719-730.Google Scholar · Zbl 1406.91180
[34] [34] Kesselheim T, Tönnis A (2017) Submodular secretary problems: Cardinality, matching, and linear constraints. Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, vol. 81 (Schloss Dagstuhl—Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany), 16:1-16:22.Google Scholar · Zbl 1467.68225
[35] [35] Khalilabadi PJ, Tardos É (2018) Simple and efficient budget feasible mechanisms for monotone submodular valuations. Proc. 14th Internat. Conf. Web Internet Econom. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 11316 (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 246-263.Google Scholar · Zbl 1437.91129
[36] [36] Kulik A, Shachnai H, Tamir T (2013) Approximations for monotone and non-monotone submodular maximization with knapsack constraints. Math. Oper. Res. 38(4):729-739.Link, Google Scholar · Zbl 1291.90205
[37] [37] Lehmann B, Lehmann DJ, Nisan N (2006) Combinatorial auctions with decreasing marginal utilities. Games Econom. Behav. 55(2):270-296.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1125.91043 · doi:10.1016/j.geb.2005.02.006
[38] [38] Leonardi S, Monaco G, Sankowski P, Zhang Q (2016) Budget feasible mechanisms on matroids. Preprint, submitted December 9, https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03150.Google Scholar
[39] [39] Leonardi S, Monaco G, Sankowski P, Zhang Q (2017) Budget feasible mechanisms on matroids. Proc. 19th Internat. Conf. Integer Programming Combin. Optim. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10328 (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 368-379.Google Scholar · Zbl 1422.91312
[40] [40] Mirrokni VS, Schapira M, Vondrák J (2008) Tight information-theoretic lower bounds for welfare maximization in combinatorial auctions. Proc. Ninth ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 70-77.Google Scholar
[41] [41] Mirzasoleiman B, Badanidiyuru A, Karbasi A (2016) Fast constrained submodular maximization: Personalized data summarization. Proc. 33rd Internat. Conf. Machine Learn., Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, vol. 48, 1358-1367.Google Scholar
[42] [42] Myerson R (1981) Optimal auction design. Math. Oper. Res. 6(1):58-73.Link, Google Scholar · Zbl 0496.90099
[43] [43] Nemhauser GL, Wolsey LA, Fisher ML (1978) An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions—I. Math. Programming 14(1):265-294.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 0374.90045 · doi:10.1007/BF01588971
[44] [44] Schrijver A (2003) Combinatorial Optimization: Polyhedra and Efficiency. Algorithms and Combinatorics, vol. 24 (Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin).Google Scholar · Zbl 1041.90001
[45] [45] Singer Y (2010) Budget feasible mechanisms. Proc. 51th Annual IEEE Sympos. Foundations Comput. Sci. (IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC), 765-774.Google Scholar
[46] [46] Singer Y (2012) How to win friends and influence people, truthfully: Influence maximization mechanisms for social networks. Proc. Fifth Internat. Conf. Web Search Web Data Mining (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 733-742.Google Scholar
[47] [47] Singer Y, Mittal M (2013) Pricing mechanisms for crowdsourcing markets. Proc. 22nd Internat. World Wide Web Conf. (International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee/Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1157-1166.Google Scholar
[48] [48] Singla A, Krause A (2013) Incentives for privacy tradeoff in community sensing. Proc. First AAAI Conf. Human Comput. Crowdsourcing (Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Menlo Park, CA).Google Scholar
[49] [49] Sviridenko M (2004) A note on maximizing a submodular set function subject to a knapsack constraint. Oper. Res. Lett. 32(1):41-43.Crossref, Google Scholar · Zbl 1056.90124 · doi:10.1016/S0167-6377(03)00062-2
[50] [50] Wolsey LA (1982) Maximising real-valued submodular functions: Primal and dual heuristics for location problems. Math. Oper. Res. 7(3):410-425.Link, Google Scholar · Zbl 0498.90024
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.