IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v324y2025i3p941-952.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Randomized strategyproof mechanisms with best of both worlds fairness and efficiency

Author

Listed:
  • Sun, Ankang
  • Chen, Bo

Abstract

We study the problem of mechanism design for allocating a set of indivisible items among agents with private preferences on items. We aim to design a mechanism that is strategyproof (in which agents find it optimal to report their true preferences) and ensures a certain level of fairness and efficiency. We first establish that no deterministic mechanism can simultaneously be strategyproof, fair, and efficient for the allocation of indivisible chores. We then introduce randomness to address this impossibility. For allocating indivisible chores, we propose randomized mechanisms that are strategyproof in expectation as well as ex-ante and ex-post (best of both worlds) fair and efficient. For allocating mixed items—where an item may be a good (positive utility) for one agent and a chore (negative utility) for another, we propose randomized mechanisms that are strategyproof in expectation while ensuring fairness and efficiency for two-agent scenarios.

Suggested Citation

  • Sun, Ankang & Chen, Bo, 2025. "Randomized strategyproof mechanisms with best of both worlds fairness and efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 324(3), pages 941-952.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:324:y:2025:i:3:p:941-952
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2025.02.027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037722172500150X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2025.02.027?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:ejores:v:324:y:2025:i:3:p:941-952. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.