Papers for

resource allocation teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Fair item sharing with money adjusts to varying values and needs

Tight Subsidy Bounds for Weighted Proportional Allocation of Mixed Manna

Abstract: We study the problem of fairly allocating m indivisible items among n agents with possibly unequal entitlements in the mixed manna setting, where each item may be perceived as a good or a chore by different agents. We focus on the fundamental fairness notion of proportionality. Since proportional allocations need not exist in this setting, we allow monetary subsidies to restore proportionality while minimizing the total subsidy. When each item's (dis)utility is bounded by 1, a total subsidy of at least τ(n) \approx n/4 may be necessary. For goods-only or chores-only instances, the best previously known upper bound was n/3-1/6 due to Wu and Zhou~(2024). We close this gap by proving that a total subsidy of at most τ(n) always suffices, thereby establishing the tight subsidy bound. Our results hold even in the more general setting of weighted mixed manna, resolving an open question posed by~Wu et al. (2023) and Garg et al. (2026). The allocation also satisfies weighted proportionality up to one item (WPROP1). Our proof develops a novel application of the Knaster-Kuratowski-Mazurkiewicz (KKM) fixed-point theorem, extending the KKM framework to share-based fairness notions. Finally, we design a polynomial-time algorithm to compute such allocations for any fixed number of agents.

Mon 14 SeptComputer Science and Game TheoryData Structures and Algorithms
The gist
When dividing things that people want or dislike in different ways, it’s hard to be fair to everyone. The paper looks at how to share items fairly even if people value them differently, by giving extra money called subsidies to balance things out. The authors found the best possible limit on how much money is needed to keep fairness in these tricky cases. They use advanced math to prove their results and also created a quick method to find such fair divisions when the number of people is small. This work answers questions from earlier research about sharing items that can be good or bad to different people.
Open 2609.15208v1

Utility design improves worst case outcomes in networked multi-agent games

Deriving the Pure Price of Anarchy for Networked Resource Allocation Games

Abstract: This work considers multi-agent coordination with arbitrary information networks among the agents using a game-theoretic approach. A system designer aims to assign local utility functions to the agents to guide their actions toward a desired system objective. The performance of the assigned local utilities is measured by the well known pure price of anarchy (pPoA) metric that equals the ratio of the system objective at the worst pure Nash equilibrium of the corresponding game to the optimal system objective. Our aim is to derive the utility functions which optimize the pPoA-based performance guarantees for any given information network and system objective. We develop a linear program that derives the optimal pPoA for any arbitrary information network and arbitrary system objective. Our work is the first to solve optimal utility design for arbitrary networks; our techniques generalize previous approaches which considered only the full-information setting. For supermodular objective functions, we prove that counterintuitively, a fully communication-denied utility design is optimal irrespective of the original information network. For submodular system objectives, an exhaustive numerical analysis suggests that the optimal utility design is robust to communication failures even for this case. When the system objective is weighted maximum coverage, the marginal contribution utility design provably optimizes the pPoA for a wide variety of information networks of interest.

Thu 10 SeptComputer Science and Game TheoryMultiagent Systems
The gist
When many agents work together but only have partial communication with each other, it’s tricky to design incentives so they achieve the best overall outcome. The authors study how to assign local rewards to these agents to steer them toward good results, measured by how bad the worst stable outcome can be compared to the ideal. They provide a way to find the best local reward designs for any network setup using a mathematical program. Surprisingly, sometimes cutting off all communication among agents leads to the best behavior. Their approach also finds good solutions for many kinds of problems including coverage tasks.
Open 2609.12077v1