Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Best-of-Both-Worlds Fairness of the Envy-Cycle-Elimination Algorithm

Jugal Garg, Eklavya Sharma

TL;DR

For two agents, it is shown that a randomized variant of ECE can compute an ex-post EFX and ex-ante envy-free allocation in near-linear time, but for three agents, it is shown that several natural randomization methods for ECE fail to achieve ex-ante proportionality.

Abstract

We consider the problem of fairly dividing indivisible goods among agents with additive valuations. It is known that an Epistemic EFX and $2/3$-MMS allocation can be obtained using the Envy-Cycle-Elimination (ECE) algorithm. In this work, we explore whether this algorithm can be randomized to also ensure ex-ante proportionality. For two agents, we show that a randomized variant of ECE can compute an ex-post EFX and ex-ante envy-free allocation in near-linear time. However, for three agents, we show that several natural randomization methods for ECE fail to achieve ex-ante proportionality.

Best-of-Both-Worlds Fairness of the Envy-Cycle-Elimination Algorithm

TL;DR

For two agents, it is shown that a randomized variant of ECE can compute an ex-post EFX and ex-ante envy-free allocation in near-linear time, but for three agents, it is shown that several natural randomization methods for ECE fail to achieve ex-ante proportionality.

Abstract

We consider the problem of fairly dividing indivisible goods among agents with additive valuations. It is known that an Epistemic EFX and -MMS allocation can be obtained using the Envy-Cycle-Elimination (ECE) algorithm. In this work, we explore whether this algorithm can be randomized to also ensure ex-ante proportionality. For two agents, we show that a randomized variant of ECE can compute an ex-post EFX and ex-ante envy-free allocation in near-linear time. However, for three agents, we show that several natural randomization methods for ECE fail to achieve ex-ante proportionality.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 15 sections, 13 theorems, 6 equations, 3 tables, 6 algorithms.

Key Result

Lemma 3

$\mathop{\mathrm{\mathtt{toOrdered}}}\nolimits$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{\mathtt{pickBySeq}}}\nolimits$ run in $O(mn\log m)$ time, where $n$ is the number of agents and $m$ is the number of goods.

Theorems & Definitions (36)

  • Definition 1: envy-freeness
  • Definition 2: proportionality
  • Definition 3: EFX
  • Definition 4: EF1
  • Definition 5: MMS
  • Definition 6: Epistemic EFX
  • Definition 7: ex-ante and ex-post fairness
  • Definition 8: envy cycle
  • Definition 9: ordered instance
  • Definition 10
  • ...and 26 more