Paper detail

Dividing Bads is Harder than Dividing Goods: On the Complexity of Fair and Efficient Division of Chores

We study the chore division problem where a set of agents needs to divide a set of chores (bads) among themselves fairly and efficiently. We assume that agents have linear disutility (cost) functions. Like for the case of goods, competitive division is known to be arguably the best mechanism for the bads as well. However, unlike goods, there are multiple competitive divisions with very different disutility value profiles in bads. Although all competitive divisions satisfy the standard notions of fairness and efficiency, some divisions are significantly fairer and efficient than the others. This raises two important natural questions: Does there exist a competitive division in which no agent is assigned a chore that she hugely dislikes? Are there simple sufficient conditions for the existence and polynomial-time algorithms assuming them? We investigate both these questions in this paper. We show that the first problem is strongly NP-hard. Further, we derive a simple sufficient condition for the existence, and we show that finding a competitive division is PPAD-hard assuming the condition. These results are in sharp contrast to the case of goods where both problems are strongly polynomial-time solvable. To the best of our knowledge, these are the first hardness results for the chore division problem, and, in fact, for any economic model under linear preferences.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.