IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v72y2011i1p1-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Derandomization of auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Aggarwal, Gagan
  • Fiat, Amos
  • Goldberg, Andrew V.
  • Hartline, Jason D.
  • Immorlica, Nicole
  • Sudan, Madhu

Abstract

We study the role of randomization in seller optimal (i.e., profit maximization) auctions. Bayesian optimal auctions (e.g., Myerson, 1981) assume that the valuations of the agents are random draws from a distribution and prior-free optimal auctions either are randomized (e.g., Goldberg et al., 2006) or assume the valuations are randomized (e.g., Segal, 2003). Is randomization fundamental to profit maximization in auctions? Our main result is a general approach to derandomize single-item multi-unit unit-demand auctions while approximately preserving their performance (i.e., revenue). Our general technique is constructive but not computationally tractable. We complement the general result with the explicit and computationally-simple derandomization of a particular auction. Our results are obtained through analogy to hat puzzles that are interesting in their own right.

Suggested Citation

  • Aggarwal, Gagan & Fiat, Amos & Goldberg, Andrew V. & Hartline, Jason D. & Immorlica, Nicole & Sudan, Madhu, 2011. "Derandomization of auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 1-11, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:72:y:2011:i:1:p:1-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899-8256(10)00128-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ilya Segal, 2003. "Optimal Pricing Mechanisms with Unknown Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 509-529, June.
    2. HervÊ Moulin, 1999. "Incremental cost sharing: Characterization by coalition strategy-proofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(2), pages 279-320.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:gamebe:v:72:y:2011:i:1:p:1-11. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.