Source author record

Walter Kern

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

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

5works
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

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

5 published item(s)

preprint2018arXiv

Simple Games versus Weighted Voting Games: Bounding the Critical Threshold Value

A simple game $(N,v)$ is given by a set $N$ of $n$ players and a partition of~$2^N$ into a set~$\mathcal{L}$ of losing coalitions~$L$ with value $v(L)=0$ that is closed under taking subsets and a set $\mathcal{W}$ of winning coalitions $W$ with $v(W)=1$. Simple games with $α= \min_{p\geq 0}\max_{W\in {\cal W}, L\in {\cal L}} \frac{p(L)}{p(W)}<1$ are exactly the weighted voting games. We show that $α\leq \frac{1}{4}n$ for every simple game $(N,v)$, confirming the conjecture of Freixas and Kurz (IJGT, 2014). For complete simple games, Freixas and Kurz conjectured that $α=O(\sqrt{n})$. We prove this conjecture up to a $\ln n$ factor. We also prove that for graphic simple games, that is, simple games in which every minimal winning coalition has size~2, computing $α$ is \NP-hard, but polynomial-time solvable if the underlying graph is bipartite. Moreover, we show that for every graphic simple game, deciding if $α<a$ is polynomial-time solvable for every fixed $a>0$.

preprint2016arXiv

Note on VCG vs. Price Raising for Matching Markets

In \cite{EK10} the use of VCG in matching markets is motivated by saying that in order to compute market clearing prices in a matching market, the auctioneer needs to know the true valuations of the bidders. Hence VCG and corresponding personalized prices are proposed as an incentive compatible mechanism. The same line of argument pops up in several lecture sheets and other documents related to courses based on Easley and Kleinberg's book, seeming to suggest that computing market clearing prices and corresponding assignments were \emph{not} incentive compatible. Main purpose of our note is to observe that, in contrast, assignments based on buyer optimal market clearing prices are indeed incentive compatible.

preprint2016arXiv

On the Factor Revealing LP Approach for Facility Location with Penalties

We consider the uncapacitated facility location problem with (linear) penalty function and show that a modified JMS algorithm, combined with a randomized LP rounding technique due to Byrka-Aardal[1], Li[14] and Li et al.[16] yields 1.488 approximation, improving the factor 1.5148 due to Li et al.[16]. This closes the current gap between the classical facility location problem and this penalized variant. Main ingredient is a straightforward adaptation of the JMS algorithm to the penalty setting plus a consistent use of the upper bounding technique for factor revealing LPs due to Fernandes et al.[7]. In contrast to the bounds in [12], our factor revealing LP is monotone.

preprint2016arXiv

The Stable Fixtures Problem with Payments

We generalize two well-known game-theoretic models by introducing multiple partners matching games, defined by a graph $G=(N,E)$, with an integer vertex capacity function $b$ and an edge weighting $w$. The set $N$ consists of a number of players that are to form a set $M\subseteq E$ of 2-player coalitions $ij$ with value $w(ij)$, such that each player $i$ is in at most $b(i)$ coalitions. A payoff vector is a mapping $p: N \times N \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ with $p(i,j)+p(j,i)=w(ij)$ if $ij\in M$ and $p(i,j)=p(j,i)=0$ if $ij\notin M$. The pair $(M,p)$ is called a solution. A pair of players $i,j$ with $ij\in E\setminus M$ blocks a solution $(M,p)$ if $i,j$ can form, possibly only after withdrawing from one of their existing 2-player coalitions, a new 2-player coalition in which they are mutually better off. A solution is stable if it has no blocking pairs. We give a polynomial-time algorithm that either finds that a given multiple partners matching game has no stable solution, or obtains a stable solution for it. We characterize the set of stable solutions of a multiple partners matching game in two different ways and show how this leads to simple proofs for a number of known results of Sotomayor (1992,1999,2007) for multiple partners ssignment games and to generalizations of some of these results to multiple partners matching games. We also perform a study on the core of the corresponding cooperative game, where coalitions of any size may be formed. In particular we show that the standard relation between the existence of a stable solution and the non-emptiness of the core, which holds in the other models with payments, is no longer valid for our (most general) model. We also prove that the problem of deciding if an allocation belongs to the core jumps from being polynomial-time solvable for $b\leq 2$ to NP-complete for $b\equiv 3$.

preprint2012arXiv

Max-Flow on Regular Spaces

The max-flow and max-coflow problem on directed graphs is studied in the common generalization to regular spaces, i.e., to kernels or row spaces of totally unimodular matrices. Exhibiting a submodular structure of the family of paths within this model we generalize the Edmonds-Karp variant of the classical Ford-Fulkerson method and show that the number of augmentations is quadratically bounded if augmentations are chosen along shortest possible augmenting paths.