Bidding for Envy-Freeness: A Procedural Approach to n-Player Fair Division Problems



Bidding for envy-freeness

729


Let aij denote Player i’s assessment of the value of Player j’s bundle minus
its cost:

aij ¼ bi(Bj )- Cj ¼ bi (Bj )~ bj (Bj ) + dj ; i; j A I ;                         (1)

where dj is the discount that Player j has received during the procedure (at the
start
dj ¼ 0). We call A ¼(aij) the assessment matrix. Note that if aii aij
then Player i will experience envy for Player j. Without additional restrictions
on bundles, the utilitarian assignment simply assigns each object to the player
who values it most. The assessment matrix will thus be envy-free from the
start, since
aii b aij . With additional restrictions, however, this will generally
not be the case, and envious players will need to be compensated. The com-
plete compensation procedure is described as follows.

The compensation procedure for a utilitarian assignment

1. Assign bundles to players using the utilitarian assignment. Each player ini-
tially contributes her bid on her assigned bundle, yielding a pool of size
M
from which the cost C is paid.

2. Calculate the assessment matrix. Note that there will always be at least
one player who experiences no envy (see Theorem 1). If all players are non-
envious, skip to Step 5.

3. Now perform a round of compensations: use the assessment matrix to iden-
tify all players whose maximum envy is directed towards a non-envious
player, and compensate these individuals from the surplus by their maxi-
mum envy difference. 8 Then recalculate the assessment matrix (but only
after all the compensations have been made in this round).

4. Perform additional compensation rounds until all envy is eliminated. (Theo-
rem 2 shows that at most
(n 1) compensation rounds will be needed.)

5. The sum of the compensations made in Steps 3 and 4 is minimal (see The-
orem 3), and it will never exceed the surplus
M C (see Theorem 4).
Therefore distribute any remaining surplus in a way that maintains envy-
freeness; e.g., one could simply divide it equally among all players. (Sect. 5
discusses an alternative method for post-envy allocation of the remaining
surplus.)

To illustrate we give an example. Suppose there are four players (denoted
P
i) who submit bids for a joint venture that has a total cost of C ¼ 100. The
utilitarian assignment determines four bundles (denoted
Bi) for which players
have the valuations given in Table 1.

The bids in the utilitarian assignment (the framed entries along the diago-
nal of Table 1) are collected as initial payments. Since they sum to 145, after
paying the cost of 100, there is a surplus of 45 left to return to the players in
the form of discounts. The assessment matrix can be computed by subtracting

8 Alternatively, one could compensate all envious players. However, this would require
more compensations in each round, but not fewer rounds.



More intriguing information

1. INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES
2. Handling the measurement error problem by means of panel data: Moment methods applied on firm data
3. Are Japanese bureaucrats politically stronger than farmers?: The political economy of Japan's rice set-aside program
4. Learning-by-Exporting? Firm-Level Evidence for UK Manufacturing and Services Sectors
5. Income Taxation when Markets are Incomplete
6. Credit Markets and the Propagation of Monetary Policy Shocks
7. The name is absent
8. Education Responses to Climate Change and Quality: Two Parts of the Same Agenda?
9. The name is absent
10. Foreign Direct Investment and the Single Market
11. Incorporating global skills within UK higher education of engineers
12. DEVELOPING COLLABORATION IN RURAL POLICY: LESSONS FROM A STATE RURAL DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
13. A Computational Model of Children's Semantic Memory
14. Accurate and robust image superresolution by neural processing of local image representations
15. 03-01 "Read My Lips: More New Tax Cuts - The Distributional Impacts of Repealing Dividend Taxation"
16. NATURAL RESOURCE SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS: A COMPUTABLE GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM APPROACH
17. Non Linear Contracting and Endogenous Buyer Power between Manufacturers and Retailers: Empirical Evidence on Food Retailing in France
18. Migration and employment status during the turbulent nineties in Sweden
19. Rent Dissipation in Chartered Recreational Fishing: Inside the Black Box
20. An Investigation of transience upon mothers of primary-aged children and their school