Strategyproof Quota Mechanisms for Multiple Assignment Problems
نویسندگان
چکیده
We study the problem of allocating multiple objects to agents without transferable utilities, where each agent may receive more than one object according to a quota. Under lexicographic preferences, we characterize the set of strategyproof, non-bossy, and neutral quota mechanisms and show that under a mild Pareto efficiency condition, serial dictatorship quota mechanisms are the only mechanisms satisfying these properties. Dropping the neutrality requirement, this class of quota mechanisms further expands to sequential dictatorship quota mechanisms. We then extend quota mechanisms to randomized settings, and show that the random serial dictatorship quota mechanisms (RSDQ) are envyfree, strategyproof, and ex post efficient for any number of agents and objects and any quota system, proving that the well-studied Random Serial Dictatorship (RSD) satisfies envyfreeness when preferences are lexicographic.
منابع مشابه
Fairness and group-strategyproofness clash in assignment problems
No group-strategyproof and ex-post Pareto optimal randommatching mechanism treats equals equally. Every mechanism that arises out of the randomization over a set of non-bossy and strategyproof mechanisms is non-bossy. Random serial dictatorship, which arises out of the randomization over deterministic serial dictatorships is non-bossy but not group-strategyproof.
متن کاملPartial Strategyproofness: An Axiomatic Approach to Relaxing Strategyproofness for Assignment Mechanisms
We present partial strategyproofness, a new, relaxed notion of strategyproofness to study the incentive properties of non-strategyproof assignment mechanisms. Under partially strategyproof mechanisms, truthful reporting is a dominant strategy for agents who have sufficiently different valuations for different objects. A single numerical parameter, the degree of strategyproofness, controls the e...
متن کاملThe Multi-unit Assignment Problem: Theory and Evidence from Course Allocation at Harvard
We use theory and eld data to study the draft mechanism used to allocate courses at Harvard Business School. We show that the draft is manipulable in theory, manipulated in practice, and that these manipulations cause signi cant welfare loss. Nevertheless, we nd that welfare is higher than under its widely studied strategyproof alternative. We identify a new link between fairness and welfare ...
متن کاملStrategyproofness for "Price Takers" as a Desideratum for Market Design
We distinguish between two ways a mechanism can fail to be strategyproof. A mechanism may have manipulations that persist with market size ( rst-order manipulations); and, a mechanism may have manipulations that vanish with market size (second-order manipulations). We say that a non-strategyproof mechanism is strategyproof for price takers (SP (p)) if all of its manipulations vanish with market...
متن کاملPartial Strategyproofness: An Axiomatic Approach to Relaxing Strategyproofness for Random Assignment Mechanisms
In this paper, we present a new relaxed notion of strategyproofness to study the incentive properties of non-strategyproof random assignment mechanisms. To this end, we first prove a new decomposition of full strategyproofness into three axioms: swap monotonicity, upper invariance, and lower invariance. By dropping the lower invariance axiom we obtain partially strategyproof mechanisms, which r...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- CoRR
دوره abs/1507.07064 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2015