Almost Group Envy-free Allocation of Indivisible Goods and Chores

We consider a multi-agent resource allocation setting in which an agent's utility may decrease or increase when an item is allocated. We take the group envy-freeness concept that is well-established in the literature and present stronger and relaxed versions that are especially suitable for the allocation of indivisible items. Of particular interest is a concept called group envy-freeness up to one item (GEF1). We then present a clear taxonomy of the fairness concepts. We study which fairness concepts guarantee the existence of a fair allocation under which preference domain. For two natural classes of additive utilities, we design polynomial-time algorithms to compute a GEF1 allocation. We also prove that checking whether a given allocation satisfies GEF1 is coNP-complete when there are either only goods, only chores or both.

Fair Division in the Internet Age

Fair division, a key concern in the design of many social institutions, has for 70 years been the subject of interdisciplinary research at the interface of mathematics, economics, and game theory. Motivated by the proliferation of moneyless transactions on the internet, the computer science community has recently taken a deep interest in fairness principles and practical division rules. The resulting literature brings a fresh concern for computational simplicity (scalable rules) and realistic implementation. In this review of the most salient fair division results of the past 30 years, I concentrate on division rules with the best potential for practical implementation. The critical design parameter is the message space that the agents must use to report their individual preferences. A simple preference domain is key both to realistic implementation and to the existence of division rules with strong normative and incentive properties. I discuss successively the one-dimensional single-peaked domain, Leontief utilities, ordinal ranking, dichotomous preferences, and additive utilities. Some of the theoretical results in the latter domain are already implemented in the user-friendly SPLIDDIT platform ( http://spliddit.org ).

Comparing Options with Argument Schemes Powered by Cancellation

We introduce a way of reasoning about preferences represented as pairwise comparative statements, based on a very simple yet appealing principle: cancelling out common values across statements. We formalize and streamline this procedure with argument schemes. As a result, any conclusion drawn by means of this approach comes along with a justification. It turns out that the statements which can be inferred through this process form a proper preference relation. More precisely, it corresponds to a necessary preference relation under the assumption of additive utilities. We show the inference task can be performed in polynomial time in this setting, but that finding a minimal length explanation is NP-complete.

When Do Envy-Free Allocations Exist?

We consider a fair division setting in which m indivisible items are to be allocated among n agents, where the agents have additive utilities and the agents’ utilities for individual items are independently sampled from a distribution. Previous work has shown that an envy-free allocation is likely to exist when m = Ω (n log n) but not when m = n + o (n), and left open the question of determining where the phase transition from non-existence to existence occurs. We show that, surprisingly, there is in fact no universal point of transition— instead, the transition is governed by the divisibility relation between m and n. On the one hand, if m is divisible by n, an envy-free allocation exists with high probability as long as m ≥ 2n. On the other hand, if m is not “almost” divisible by , an envy-free allocation is unlikely to exist even when m = Θ(n log n)/log log n).

Computing an Approximately Optimal Agreeable Set of Items

We study the problem of finding a small subset of items that is agreeable to all agents, meaning that all agents value the subset at least as much as its complement. Previous work has shown worst-case bounds, over all instances with a given number of agents and items, on the number of items that may need to be included in such a subset. Our goal in this paper is to efficiently compute an agreeable subset whose size approximates the size of the smallest agreeable subset for a given instance. We consider three well-known models for representing the preferences of the agents: ordinal preferences on single items, the value oracle model, and additive utilities. In each of these models, we establish virtually tight bounds on the approximation ratio that can be obtained by algorithms running in polynomial time.

Fair Division of a Graph

We consider fair allocation of indivisible items under an additional constraint: there is an undirected graph describing the relationship between the items, and each agent's share must form a connected subgraph of this graph. This framework captures, e.g., fair allocation of land plots, where the graph describes the accessibility relation among the plots. We focus on agents that have additive utilities for the items, and consider several common fair division solution concepts, such as proportionality, envy-freeness and maximin share guarantee. While finding good allocations according to these solution concepts is computationally hard in general, we design efficient algorithms for special cases wherethe underlying graph has simple structure, and/or the number of agents---or, less restrictively, the number of agent types---is small. In particular, despite non-existence results in the general case, we prove that for acyclic graphs a maximin share allocation always exists and can be found efficiently.