Complexity of Mechanism Design
Vincent Conitzer, Tuomas Sandholm
Abstract
The aggregation of conflicting preferences is a central problem in multiagent systems. The key difficulty is that the agents may report their preferences insincerely. Mechanism design is the art of designing the rules of the game so that the agents are motivated to report their preferences truthfully and a (socially) desirable outcome is chosen. We propose an approach where a mechanism is automatically created for the preference aggregation setting at hand. This has several advantages, but the downside is that the mechanism design optimization problem needs to be solved anew each time. Focusing on settings where side payments are not possible, we show that the mechanism design problem is NP-complete for deterministic mechanisms. This holds both for dominant-strategy implementation and for Bayes-Nash implementation. We then show that if we allow randomized mechanisms, the mechanism design problem becomes tractable. In other words, the coordinator can tackle the computational complexity introduced by its uncertainty about the agents' preferences by making the agents face additional uncertainty. This comes at no loss, and in some cases at a gain, in the (social) objective.
Create a lesson
Related papers
A 1/2-Approximation for Pandora's Problem with Deadlines
Shenyu Qin, Chihao Zhang, Yuhao Zhang et al.
Asymmetric Information in Dynamic Lending Games
Kristijan Atanasov, Frederik Mallmann-Trenn, Carmine Ventre
The Distortion of Threshold Approval Multiwinner Voting
Mohamad Latifian, Marzieh Nilipour, Alexandros A. Voudouris
Complexity of Autobidding Equilibria in GSP Sponsored Shopping
Kristoffer Arnsfelt Hansen, Yuhao Li, Xinhao Nie
Limit-sure Winning in Team Games without Shared Randomness
Léonard Brice, Thomas A. Henzinger, Alipasha Montaseri et al.
Network Topology Shapes AI Intervention Effectiveness on Deception: Truth-Telling vs. Investigative Agents
Zhao Song, Stefan Sarkadi, The Anh Han