Paper detail

Funding Games: the Truth but not the Whole Truth

We introduce the Funding Game, in which $m$ identical resources are to be allocated among $n$ selfish agents. Each agent requests a number of resources $x_i$ and reports a valuation $\tilde{v}_i(x_i)$, which verifiably {\em lower}-bounds $i$'s true value for receiving $x_i$ items. The pairs $(x_i, \tilde{v}_i(x_i))$ can be thought of as size-value pairs defining a knapsack problem with capacity $m$. A publicly-known algorithm is used to solve this knapsack problem, deciding which requests to satisfy in order to maximize the social welfare. We show that a simple mechanism based on the knapsack {\it highest ratio greedy} algorithm provides a Bayesian Price of Anarchy of 2, and for the complete information version of the game we give an algorithm that computes a Nash equilibrium strategy profile in $O(n^2 \log^2 m)$ time. Our primary algorithmic result shows that an extension of the mechanism to $k$ rounds has a Price of Anarchy of $1 + \frac{1}{k}$, yielding a graceful tradeoff between communication complexity and the social welfare.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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.