IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nad/wpaper/20180013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Dual Auctions for Assigning Winners and Compensating Losers

Author

Listed:
  • John Wooders
  • Matt Van Essen

    (Division of Social Science)

Abstract

We study the problem of allocating goods (or rights) and chores when participants have equal claim on a unit of the good or equal obligation to undertake a chore. We propose two dynamic auctions for solving problems of this type: a "goods" auction and a "chore" auction, which are duals of one another. Either auction can be used for allocating goods or chores by suitably deÖning a good or a chore. The auctions are efficient and payoff equivalent. We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for equilibrium for general utility functions for both auctions, and provide closed-form solutions when bidders are risk neutral and when they are CARA risk averse. The auctions have the same limit equilibrium bid function as bidders become infinitely risk averse. We show that the limit bid function is also the unique maxmin perfect strategy for both auctions.

Suggested Citation

  • John Wooders & Matt Van Essen, 2018. "Dual Auctions for Assigning Winners and Compensating Losers," Working Papers 20180013, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Jan 2018.
    • Handle: RePEc:nad:wpaper:20180013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://nyuad.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyuad/academics/divisions/social-science/working-papers/2018/0013.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2018
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2016. "Dissolving a partnership dynamically," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 212-241.
    2. Hu, Audrey & Zou, Liang, 2015. "Sequential auctions, price trends, and risk preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 158(PA), pages 319-335.
    3. Walker, Mark, 1980. "On the Nonexistence of a Dominant Strategy Mechanism for Making Optimal Public Decisions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(6), pages 1521-1540, September.
    4. , & , & ,, 2006. "Optimal auctions with ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(4), pages 411-438, December.
    5. María‐Angeles de Frutos & Thomas Kittsteiner, 2008. "Efficient partnership dissolution under buy‐sell clauses," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 184-198, March.
    6. Long, Yan & Mishra, Debasis & Sharma, Tridib, 2017. "Balanced ranking mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 9-39.
    7. Green, Jerry & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1977. "Characterization of Satisfactory Mechanisms for the Revelation of Preferences for Public Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(2), pages 427-438, March.
    8. Richard R. W. Brooks & Claudia M. Landeo & Kathryn E. Spier, 2010. "Trigger happy or gun shy? Dissolving common‐value partnerships with Texas shootouts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 649-673, December.
    9. Salo, Ahti A & Weber, Martin, 1995. "Ambiguity Aversion in First-Price Sealed-Bid Auctions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 123-137, September.
    10. Shengwu Li, 2017. "Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3257-3287, November.
    11. Roger B. Myerson, 1977. "Graphs and Cooperation in Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 225-229, August.
    12. Farzad Pourbabaee, 2022. "Robust experimentation in the continuous time bandit problem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 73(1), pages 151-181, February.
    13. Claudio Mezzetti, 2011. "Sequential Auctions with Informational Externalities and Aversion to Price Risk: Decreasing and Increasing Price Sequences," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(555), pages 990-1016, September.
    14. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2021. "Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    15. Wasser, Cédric, 2013. "Bilateral k+1-price auctions with asymmetric shares and values," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 350-368.
    16. Chakravarty,Satya R. & Mitra,Manipushpak & Sarkar,Palash, 2015. "A Course on Cooperative Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107058798.
    17. Preston McAfee, R., 1992. "Amicable divorce: Dissolving a partnership with simple mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 266-293, April.
    18. Green, Jerry & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1977. "On the revelation of preferences for public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 79-93, August.
    19. Moulin, Herve, 1992. "An Application of the Shapley Value to Fair Division with Money," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1331-1349, November.
    20. Boyce, John R, 1994. "Allocation of Goods by Lottery," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 32(3), pages 457-476, July.
    21. Roberto Serrano, 2021. "Sixty-seven years of the Nash program: time for retirement?," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 35-48, March.
    22. Jaeyoung Sung, 2022. "Optimal contracting under mean-volatility joint ambiguity uncertainties," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(2), pages 593-642, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yan Long, 2020. "Optimal budget-balanced ranking mechanisms to assign identical objects," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(2), pages 467-502, September.
    2. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2021. "Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2021. "Allocating positions fairly: Auctions and Shapley value," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Van Essen, Matt & Wooders, John, 2016. "Dissolving a partnership dynamically," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 212-241.
    3. Long, Yan & Mishra, Debasis & Sharma, Tridib, 2017. "Balanced ranking mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 9-39.
    4. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Martimort, David, 2005. "The design of transnational public good mechanisms for developing countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 159-196, February.
    5. Tomoeda, Kentaro, 2019. "Efficient investments in the implementation problem," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 247-278.
    6. Clark Robinson & Gerry Suchanek, 1985. "On the design of optimal mechanisms for the Arrow-Hahn-McKenzie economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 313-335, January.
    7. Matsushima, Hitoshi & Noda, Shunya, 2023. "Mechanism design with general ex-ante investments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Ryuji Sano, 2021. "Dynamic communication mechanism design," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 163-180, July.
    9. Tian, Guoqiang, 1997. "Virtual implementation in incomplete information environments with infinite alternatives and types," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 313-339, October.
    10. Diego Moreno & María Moscoso, 2013. "Strategy-proof allocation mechanisms for economies with public goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(1), pages 315-336, January.
    11. Makowski, Louis & Ostroy, Joseph M. & Segal, Uzi, 1999. "Efficient Incentive Compatible Economies Are Perfectly Competitive," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 169-225, April.
    12. Hitoshi Matsushima & Shunya Noda, 2019. "Mechanism Design with General Ex-Ante Investments (Revised version of F415 )," CARF F-Series CARF-F-464, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    13. Louis Makowski & Joseph M. Ostroy, 1992. "General Equilibrium and Market Socialism: Clarifying the Logic of Competitive Markets," UCLA Economics Working Papers 672, UCLA Department of Economics.
    14. Alejandro Francetich, 2023. "When partner knows best: asymmetric expertise in partnerships," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 52(2), pages 363-399, June.
    15. Hitoshi Matsushima & Shunya Noda, 2017. "Mechanism Design in Hidden Action and Hidden Information: Richness and Pure-VCG," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1057, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    16. Ghosh, Gagan & Liu, Heng, 2021. "Sequential auctions with ambiguity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    17. Seiglie Carlos & Xiang Jun, 2017. "Determining Values Using Options Contracts," Asian Journal of Law and Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, April.
    18. Manipushpak Mitra, 2001. "Mechanism design in queueing problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 17(2), pages 277-305.
    19. Aperjis, Christina & Kotowski, Maciej & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2019. "Efficient Division When Preferences are Private: Using the Expected Externality Mechanism," Working Paper Series rwp19-014, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    20. Monique Florenzano, 2009. "From equilibrium models to mechanism design: On the place and the role of government in the public goods provision analysis in the second part of the twentieth century," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00367859, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nad:wpaper:20180013. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alizeh Batra (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecnyuae.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.