BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Timo Mennle

Timo Mennle appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Computer Science and Game Theory

Catalog footprint

What is connected

4works
1topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

An Axiomatic Decomposition of Strategyproofness for Ordinal Mechanism with Indifferences

We study mechanism which operate on ordinal preference information (i.e., rank ordered lists of alternatives) on the full domain of weak preferences that admits indifferences. We present a novel decomposition of strategyproofness into three axioms: separation monotonic, separation upper invariant, and separation lower invariant. Each axiom is a natural restriction on how mechanisms can react when agents change their opinion about the relative ranking of any two adjacently ranked groups of alternatives. Our result extends a result from (Mennle and Seuken, 2017), a decomposition of strategyproofness for strict preferences, to the full domain that includes weak preferences.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Local Sufficiency for Partial Strategyproofness

In (Mennle and Seuken, 2017), we have introduced partial strategyproofness, a new, relaxed notion of strategyproofness, to study the incentive properties of non-strategyproof assignment mechanisms. In this paper, we present results pertaining to local sufficiency for partial strategyproofness: We show that, for any r in [0,1], r-local partial strategyproofness implies r^2-partial strategyproofness, and we show that this is the tightest polynomial bound for which a guarantee can be proven. Our results unify the two prior local sufficiency results for strategyproofness (Carroll, 2012) and lexicographic dominance-strategyproofness (Cho, 2012).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Partial Strategyproofness: Relaxing Strategyproofness for the Random Assignment Problem

We present partial strategyproofness, a new, relaxed notion of strategyproofness for studying the incentive properties of non-strategyproof assignment mechanisms. Informally, a mechanism is partially strategyproof if it makes truthful reporting a dominant strategy for those agents whose preference intensities differ sufficiently between any two objects. We demonstrate that partial strategyproofness is axiomatically motivated and yields a parametric measure for "how strategyproof" an assignment mechanism is. We apply this new concept to derive novel insights about the incentive properties of the probabilistic serial mechanism and different variants of the Boston mechanism.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Two New Impossibility Results for the Random Assignment Problem

In this note, we prove two new impossibility results for random assignment mechanisms: Bogomolnaia and Moulin (2001) showed that no assignment mechanism can satisfy strategyproofness, ordinal efficiency, and symmetry at the same time, and Mennle and Seuken (2017) gave a decomposition of strategyproofness into the axioms swap monotonicity, upper invariance, and lower invariance. For our first impossibility result, we show that upper invariance, lower invariance, ordinal efficiency, and symmetry are incompatible. This refines the prior impossibility result because it relaxes swap monotonicity. For our second impossibility result, we show that no assignment mechanism satisfies swap monotonicity, lower invariance, ordinal efficiency, anonymity, neutrality, and non-bossiness. By contrasts, the Probabilistic Serial (PS) mechanism that Bogomolnaia and Moulin (2001) introduced, satisfies these axioms when lower invariance is replaced by upper invariance. It follows that there cannot exists a lower invariant counterpart to PS.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access