IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormoor/v49y2024i4p2425-2445.html

Allocating Indivisible Goods to Strategic Agents: Pure Nash Equilibria and Fairness

Author

Listed:
  • Georgios Amanatidis

    (School of Mathematics, Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, United Kingdom; Archimedes/Athena Research Center, 15125 Marousi, Greece)

  • Georgios Birmpas

    (Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3BX, United Kingdom)

  • Federico Fusco

    (Department of Computer, Control, and Management Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Roma, Italy)

  • Philip Lazos

    (Input Output Global, London W1W 6DW, United Kingdom)

  • Stefano Leonardi

    (Department of Computer, Control, and Management Engineering, Sapienza University of Rome, 00185 Roma, Italy)

  • Rebecca Reiffenhäuser

    (Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam, 1012 WP Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Abstract

We consider the problem of fairly allocating a set of indivisible goods to a set of strategic agents with additive valuation functions. We assume no monetary transfers, and therefore, a mechanism in our setting is an algorithm that takes as input the reported—rather than the true—values of the agents. Our main goal is to explore whether there exist mechanisms that have pure Nash equilibria for every instance and, at the same time, provide fairness guarantees for the allocations that correspond to these equilibria. We focus on two relaxations of envy-freeness, namely, envy-freeness up to one good (EF1) and envy-freeness up to any good (EFX), and we positively answer the preceding question. In particular, we study two algorithms that are known to produce such allocations in the nonstrategic setting: round-robin (EF1 allocations for any number of agents) and a cut-and-choose algorithm of Plaut and Roughgarden (EFX allocations for two agents). For round-robin, we show that all of its pure Nash equilibria induce allocations that are EF1 with respect to the underlying true values, whereas for the algorithm of Plaut and Roughgarden, we show that the corresponding allocations not only are EFX, but also satisfy maximin share fairness, something that is not true for this algorithm in the nonstrategic setting! Further, we show that a weaker version of the latter result holds for any mechanism for two agents that always has pure Nash equilibria, which all induce EFX allocations.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgios Amanatidis & Georgios Birmpas & Federico Fusco & Philip Lazos & Stefano Leonardi & Rebecca Reiffenhäuser, 2024. "Allocating Indivisible Goods to Strategic Agents: Pure Nash Equilibria and Fairness," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(4), pages 2425-2445, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormoor:v:49:y:2024:i:4:p:2425-2445
    DOI: 10.1287/moor.2022.0058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/moor.2022.0058
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/moor.2022.0058?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lars Ehlers & Bettina Klaus, 2003. "Coalitional strategy-proof and resource-monotonic solutions for multiple assignment problems," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 21(2), pages 265-280, October.
    2. repec:bla:jpbect:v:3:y:2001:i:3:p:257-71 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Chen, Yiling & Lai, John K. & Parkes, David C. & Procaccia, Ariel D., 2013. "Truth, justice, and cake cutting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 284-297.
    4. Simina Brânzei & Vasilis Gkatzelis & Ruta Mehta, 2022. "Nash Social Welfare Approximation for Strategic Agents," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 402-415, January.
    5. Eric Budish, 2011. "The Combinatorial Assignment Problem: Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(6), pages 1061-1103.
    6. David A. Kohler & R. Chandrasekaran, 1971. "A Class of Sequential Games," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 270-277, April.
    7. Mohammad Ghodsi & Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi & Masoud Seddighin & Saeed Seddighin & Hadi Yami, 2021. "Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods: Improvement," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 1038-1053, August.
    8. Szilvia PÂpai, 2000. "original papers : Strategyproof multiple assignment using quotas," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 5(1), pages 91-105.
    9. Varian, Hal R., 1974. "Equity, envy, and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 63-91, September.
    10. Bettina Klaus & Eiichi Miyagawa, 2002. "Strategy-proofness, solidarity, and consistency for multiple assignment problems," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 30(3), pages 421-435.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gian Caspari, 2023. "A market design solution to a multi-category housing allocation problem," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 8(1), pages 75-96, December.
    2. Rupert Freeman & Jens Witkowski & Jennifer Wortman Vaughan & David M. Pennock, 2024. "An Equivalence Between Fair Division and Wagering Mechanisms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(10), pages 6704-6723, October.
    3. Th`anh Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym & Shai Vardi, 2023. "Dynamic Combinatorial Assignment," Papers 2303.13967, arXiv.org.
    4. Mackenzie, Andrew & Komornik, Vilmos, 2023. "Fairly taking turns," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 743-764.
    5. Christian Kroer & Alexander Peysakhovich & Eric Sodomka & Nicolas E. Stier-Moses, 2022. "Computing Large Market Equilibria Using Abstractions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(1), pages 329-351, January.
    6. Gian Caspari, 2026. "Booster draft mechanisms for multi-object assignment," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 55(1), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Thomson, William, 2011. "Chapter Twenty-One - Fair Allocation Rules," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 21, pages 393-506, Elsevier.
    8. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    9. Nikhil Garg & Ashish Goel & Benjamin Plaut, 2021. "Markets for public decision-making," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 755-801, May.
    10. Kojima, Fuhito, 2013. "Efficient resource allocation under multi-unit demand," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-14.
    11. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    12. Th`anh Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym & Shai Vardi, 2025. "Efficiency, Envy, and Incentives in Combinatorial Assignment," Papers 2509.13198, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    13. Yuji Fujinaka & Takuma Wakayama, 2011. "Secure implementation in Shapley–Scarf housing markets," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 48(1), pages 147-169, September.
    14. Antonio Romero-Medina & Matteo Triossi, 2017. "(Group) Strategy-proofness and stability in many-to many marching markets," Documentos de Trabajo 332, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    15. Papai, Szilvia, 2007. "Exchange in a general market with indivisible goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 208-235, January.
    16. Nguyen, Thành & Peivandi, Ahmad & Vohra, Rakesh, 2016. "Assignment problems with complementarities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 209-241.
    17. Onur Kesten & Selçuk Özyurt, 2025. "Strategy-Proof Multi-Issue Mediation: An Application to Online Dispute Resolution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(1), pages 678-693, January.
    18. Bettina Klaus & Alexandru Nichifor, 2020. "Serial dictatorship mechanisms with reservation prices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(3), pages 665-684, October.
    19. Di Feng & Jacob Coreno, 2024. "Justified Fairness in House Allocation Problems: two Characterizations of Strategy-proof Mechanisms," Papers 2407.14101, arXiv.org.
    20. He, Yinghua & Li, Sanxi & Yan, Jianye, 2015. "Evaluating assignment without transfers: A market perspective," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 40-44.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    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:inm:ormoor:v:49:y:2024:i:4:p:2425-2445. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.