The Unreasonable Fairness of Maximum Nash Welfare

被引:225
作者
Caragiannis, Ioannis [1 ]
Kurokawa, David [2 ]
Moulin, Herve [3 ,4 ]
Procaccia, Ariel D. [2 ]
Shah, Nisarg [5 ]
Wang, Junxing [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Patras, Patras 26504, Greece
[2] Carnegie Mellon Univ, 5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
[3] Univ Glasgow, Univ Ave, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Lanark, Scotland
[4] Higher Sch Econ, 16 Soyuza Pechatnikov St, St Petersburg 190121, Russia
[5] Univ Toronto, 10 Kings Coll Rd, Toronto, ON M5G 2R3, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会; 美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Fair division; resource allocation; Nash welfare; INDIVISIBLE GOODS; DIVISION; ENVY; ASSIGNMENT; ALLOCATIONS; EFFICIENCY;
D O I
10.1145/3355902
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
The maximum Nash welfare (MNW) solution-which selects an allocation that maximizes the product of utilities-is known to provide outstanding fairness guarantees when allocating divisible goods. And while it seems to lose its luster when applied to indivisible goods, we show that, in fact, the MNW solution is strikingly fair even in that setting. In particular, we prove that it selects allocations that are envy-free up to one good-a compelling notion that is quite elusive when coupled with economic efficiency. We also establish that the MNW solution provides a good approximation to another popular (yet possibly infeasible) fairness property, the maximin share guarantee, in theory and-even more so-in practice. While finding the MNW solution is computationally hard, we develop a nontrivial implementation and demonstrate that it scales well on real data. These results establish MNW as a compelling solution for allocating indivisible goods and underlie its deployment on a popular fair-division website.
引用
收藏
页数:32
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
Aleksandrov M, 2015, PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-FOURTH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (IJCAI), P2540
[2]   Approximation Algorithms for Computing Maximin Share Allocations [J].
Amanatidis, Georgios ;
Markakis, Evangelos ;
Nikzad, Afshin ;
Saberi, Amin .
AUTOMATA, LANGUAGES, AND PROGRAMMING, PT I, 2015, 9134 :39-51
[3]  
Anari N., 2018, P 29 ACM SIAM S DISC
[4]  
Anari Nima, 2017, P 8 INN THEOR COMP S
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2015, Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, EC '15
[6]  
Arrow K.J., 1982, HDB MATH EC
[7]   Fair assignment of indivisible objects under ordinal preferences [J].
Aziz, Haris ;
Gaspers, Serge ;
Mackenzie, Simon ;
Walsh, Toby .
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2015, 227 :71-92
[8]   THE COMPUTATIONAL DIFFICULTY OF MANIPULATING AN ELECTION [J].
BARTHOLDI, JJ ;
TOVEY, CA ;
TRICK, MA .
SOCIAL CHOICE AND WELFARE, 1989, 6 (03) :227-241
[9]   ON THE FAIR DIVISION OF A HETEROGENEOUS COMMODITY [J].
BERLIANT, M ;
THOMSON, W ;
DUNZ, K .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL ECONOMICS, 1992, 21 (03) :201-216
[10]   Random matching under dichotomous preferences [J].
Bogomolnaia, A ;
Moulin, H .
ECONOMETRICA, 2004, 72 (01) :257-279