BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Timo Mennle

Timo Mennle contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computer Science and Game Theory

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
1topics
1close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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