IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1812.11896.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Approximately Optimal Mechanism Design

Author

Listed:
  • Tim Roughgarden
  • Inbal Talgam-Cohen

Abstract

Optimal mechanism design enjoys a beautiful and well-developed theory, and also a number of killer applications. Rules of thumb produced by the field influence everything from how governments sell wireless spectrum licenses to how the major search engines auction off online advertising. There are, however, some basic problems for which the traditional optimal mechanism design approach is ill-suited---either because it makes overly strong assumptions, or because it advocates overly complex designs. This survey reviews several common issues with optimal mechanisms, including exorbitant communication, computation, and informational requirements; and it presents several examples demonstrating that passing to the relaxed goal of an approximately optimal mechanism allows us to reason about fundamental questions that seem out of reach of the traditional theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Tim Roughgarden & Inbal Talgam-Cohen, 2018. "Approximately Optimal Mechanism Design," Papers 1812.11896, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1812.11896
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.11896
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hart, Sergiu & Nisan, Noam, 2017. "Approximate revenue maximization with multiple items," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 313-347.
    2. Chaithanya Bandi & Dimitris Bertsimas, 2014. "Optimal Design for Multi-Item Auctions: A Robust Optimization Approach," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 1012-1038, November.
    3. Constantinos Daskalakis & Alan Deckelbaum & Christos Tzamos, 2017. "Strong Duality for a Multiple‐Good Monopolist," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 735-767, May.
    4. Yeon-Koo Che & Fuhito Kojima, 2010. "Asymptotic Equivalence of Probabilistic Serial and Random Priority Mechanisms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(5), pages 1625-1672, September.
    5. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    6. Baliga Sandeep & Vohra Rakesh, 2003. "Market Research and Market Design," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-27, August.
    7. Bulow, Jeremy & Klemperer, Paul, 1996. "Auctions versus Negotiations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(1), pages 180-194, March.
    8. Ilya Segal, 2003. "Optimal Pricing Mechanisms with Unknown Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 509-529, June.
    9. Nisan, Noam & Ronen, Amir, 2001. "Algorithmic Mechanism Design," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 166-196, April.
    10. Hartline, Jason D. & Kleinberg, Robert & Malekian, Azarakhsh, 2015. "Bayesian incentive compatibility via matchings," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 401-429.
    11. Neeman, Zvika, 2003. "The effectiveness of English auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 214-238, May.
    12. Nick Arnosti & Marissa Beck & Paul Milgrom, 2016. "Adverse Selection and Auction Design for Internet Display Advertising," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 2852-2866, October.
    13. Tim Roughgarden, 2010. "Computing equilibria: a computational complexity perspective," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 42(1), pages 193-236, January.
    14. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    15. Roberts, Donald John & Postlewaite, Andrew, 1976. "The Incentives for Price-Taking Behavior in Large Exchange Economies," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(1), pages 115-127, January.
    16. Swinkels, Jeroen M, 2001. "Efficiency of Large Private Value Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(1), pages 37-68, January.
    17. Gabriel Carroll, 2015. "Robustness and Linear Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 536-563, February.
    18. , & , J., 2015. "Maximal revenue with multiple goods: nonmonotonicity and other observations," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(3), September.
    19. Cramton, Peter, 1998. "The Efficiency of the FCC Spectrum Auctions," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 727-736, October.
    20. Dughmi, Shaddin & Vondrák, Jan, 2015. "Limitations of randomized mechanisms for combinatorial auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 370-400.
    21. Bikhchandani, Sushil, 1999. "Auctions of Heterogeneous Objects," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 193-220, January.
    22. Gabriel Carroll, 2017. "Robustness and Separation in Multidimensional Screening," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 453-488, March.
    23. Goldberg, Andrew V. & Hartline, Jason D. & Karlin, Anna R. & Saks, Michael & Wright, Andrew, 2006. "Competitive auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 242-269, May.
    24. Gul, Faruk & Stacchetti, Ennio, 1999. "Walrasian Equilibrium with Gross Substitutes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 95-124, July.
    25. Akbarpour, Mohammad & Malladi, Suraj & Saberi, Amin, 2018. "Just a Few Seeds More: Value of Network Information for Diffusion," Research Papers 3678, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    26. Kelso, Alexander S, Jr & Crawford, Vincent P, 1982. "Job Matching, Coalition Formation, and Gross Substitutes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1483-1504, November.
    27. repec:cup:cbooks:9781316779309 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. 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.
    29. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    30. Dütting, Paul & Talgam-Cohen, Inbal & Roughgarden, Tim, 2017. "Modularity and greed in double auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 59-83.
    31. Roughgarden,Tim, 2016. "Twenty Lectures on Algorithmic Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781316624791.
    32. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    33. Roughgarden,Tim, 2016. "Twenty Lectures on Algorithmic Game Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107172661.
    34. Jason D. Hartline & Brendan Lucier, 2015. "Non-optimal Mechanism Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(10), pages 3102-3124, October.
    35. Lehmann, Benny & Lehmann, Daniel & Nisan, Noam, 2006. "Combinatorial auctions with decreasing marginal utilities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 270-296, May.
    36. Paul Dütting & Vasilis Gkatzelis & Tim Roughgarden, 2017. "The Performance of Deferred-Acceptance Auctions," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 897-914, November.
    37. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    38. Dütting, Paul & Talgam-Cohen, Inbal & Roughgarden, Tim, 2017. "Modularity and greed in double auctions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 83199, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    39. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 1987. "A necessary and sufficient condition for rationalizability in a quasi-linear context," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 191-200, April.
    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. Tim Roughgarden & Inbal Talgam-Cohen & Qiqi Yan, 2019. "Robust Auctions for Revenue via Enhanced Competition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 1074-1094, July.
    2. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    3. Tim Roughgarden, 2018. "Complexity Theory, Game Theory, and Economics: The Barbados Lectures," Papers 1801.00734, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2020.
    4. Alexander Teytelboym & Shengwu Li & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour & Piotr Dworczak, 2021. "Discovering Auctions: Contributions of Paul Milgrom and Robert Wilson," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 709-750, July.
    5. Devanur, Nikhil R. & Hartline, Jason D. & Yan, Qiqi, 2015. "Envy freedom and prior-free mechanism design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 103-143.
    6. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2020. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free clock auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    7. Hashimoto, Tadashi, 2018. "The generalized random priority mechanism with budgets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 708-733.
    8. Moshe Babaioff & Michal Feldman & Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Brendan Lucier & Inbal Talgam-Cohen, 2020. "Escaping Cannibalization? Correlation-Robust Pricing for a Unit-Demand Buyer," Papers 2003.05913, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    9. Kazumura, Tomoya & Mishra, Debasis & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2020. "Strategy-proof multi-object mechanism design: Ex-post revenue maximization with non-quasilinear preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    10. Nisan, Noam, 2015. "Algorithmic Mechanism Design," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    11. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    12. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient Implementation with Interdependent Valuations and Maxmin Agents," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 92, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    13. Lawrence M. Ausubel, 2006. "An Efficient Dynamic Auction for Heterogeneous Commodities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 602-629, June.
    14. Lawrence M. Ausubel & Paul Milgrom, 2004. "Ascending Proxy Auctions," Discussion Papers 03-035, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    15. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Mishra, Debasis, 2022. "Selling two identical objects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    16. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2020. "Improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2020-2, Nobel Prize Committee.
    17. Núñez, Marina & Rafels, Carlos & Robles, Francisco, 2020. "A mechanism for package allocation problems with gross substitutes," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 6-14.
    18. Zhou, Yu & Serizawa, Shigehiro, 2023. "Multi-object auction design beyond quasi-linearity: Leading examples," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 210-228.
    19. Yu Zhou & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2021. "Multi-object Auction Design Beyond Quasi-linearity: Leading Examples," ISER Discussion Paper 1116r, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, revised Nov 2022.
    20. Yeon-Koo Che & Weijie Zhong, 2021. "Robustly Optimal Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods," Papers 2105.02828, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:1812.11896. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.