IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2002.03174.html

Fairness and Efficiency in Cake-Cutting with Single-Peaked Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Bhavook Bhardwaj
  • Rajnish Kumar
  • Josue Ortega

Abstract

We study the cake-cutting problem when agents have single-peaked preferences over the cake. We show that a recently proposed mechanism by Wang-Wu (2019) to obtain envy-free allocations can yield large welfare losses. Using a simplifying assumption, we characterize all Pareto optimal allocations, which have a simple structure: are peak-preserving and non-wasteful. Finally, we provide simple alternative mechanisms that Pareto dominate that of Wang-Wu, and which achieve envy-freeness or Pareto optimality.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhavook Bhardwaj & Rajnish Kumar & Josue Ortega, 2020. "Fairness and Efficiency in Cake-Cutting with Single-Peaked Preferences," Papers 2002.03174, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2020.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2002.03174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.03174
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ortega, Josué, 2018. "Social integration in two-sided matching markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 119-126.
    2. Kyropoulou, Maria & Ortega, Josué & Segal-Halevi, Erel, 2022. "Fair cake-cutting in practice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 28-49.
    3. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    4. Yan Long, 2019. "Strategy-proof group selection under single-peaked preferences over group size," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(3), pages 579-608, October.
    5. Yoichi Kasajima, 2013. "Probabilistic assignment of indivisible goods with single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(1), pages 203-215, June.
    6. Herve Moulin, 2004. "Fair Division and Collective Welfare," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262633116, December.
    7. Erel Segal-Halevi & Balázs R. Sziklai, 2019. "Monotonicity and competitive equilibrium in cake-cutting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(2), pages 363-401, September.
    8. Ruben Juarez & Rajnish Kumar, 2013. "Implementing efficient graphs in connection networks," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 54(2), pages 359-403, October.
    9. Maniquet, Francois & Sprumont, Yves, 2000. "On resource monotonicity in the fair division problem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 299-302, September.
    10. Sprumont, Yves, 1991. "The Division Problem with Single-Peaked Preferences: A Characterization of the Uniform Allocation Rule," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 509-519, March.
    11. Dimitris Bertsimas & Vivek F. Farias & Nikolaos Trichakis, 2011. "The Price of Fairness," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 17-31, February.
    12. Ortega, Josué, 2019. "The losses from integration in matching markets can be large," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 48-51.
    13. Nicolò, Antonio & Yu, Yan, 2008. "Strategic divide and choose," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 268-289, September.
    14. Ehlers, Lars & Peters, Hans & Storcken, Ton, 2002. "Strategy-Proof Probabilistic Decision Schemes for One-Dimensional Single-Peaked Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 408-434, August.
    15. Fedor Sandomirskiy & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2019. "Efficient Fair Division with Minimal Sharing," Papers 1908.01669, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    16. Weller, Dietrich, 1985. "Fair division of a measurable space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 5-17, February.
    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. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    2. Kyropoulou, Maria & Ortega, Josué & Segal-Halevi, Erel, 2022. "Fair cake-cutting in practice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 28-49.

    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. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Erel Segal-Halevi & Shmuel Nitzan & Avinatan Hassidim & Yonatan Aumann, 2020. "Envy-Free Division of Land," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 896-922, August.
    4. Kyropoulou, Maria & Ortega, Josué & Segal-Halevi, Erel, 2022. "Fair cake-cutting in practice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 28-49.
    5. Hougaard, Jens Leth & Moreno-Ternero, Juan D. & Østerdal, Lars Peter, 2014. "Assigning agents to a line," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 539-553.
    6. John A. Weymark, 2008. "Strategy‐Proofness and the Tops‐Only Property," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 7-26, February.
    7. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    8. Thomson, William, 2005. "Divide-and-permute," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 186-200, July.
    9. Orit Arzi & Yonatan Aumann & Yair Dombb, 2016. "Toss one’s cake, and eat it too: partial divisions can improve social welfare in cake cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(4), pages 933-954, April.
    10. Cole, Richard & Tao, Yixin, 2021. "On the existence of Pareto Efficient and envy-free allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    11. Chatterji, Shurojit & Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2022. "Probabilistic fixed ballot rules and hybrid domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Lars Ehlers & Bettina Klaus, 2003. "Probabilistic assignments of identical indivisible objects and uniform probabilistic rules," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 8(3), pages 249-268, October.
    13. Hadi Hosseini, 2023. "The Fairness Fair: Bringing Human Perception into Collective Decision-Making," Papers 2312.14402, arXiv.org.
    14. Kumar, Rajnish & Manocha, Kriti & Ortega, Josué, 2022. "On the integration of Shapley–Scarf markets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    15. Antonio Nicolò & Andrés Perea y Monsuwe & Paolo Roberti, 2012. "Equal opportunity equivalence in land division," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 133-142, March.
    16. Gogulapati Sreedurga & Soumyarup Sadhukhan & Souvik Roy & Yadati Narahari, 2022. "Characterization of Group-Fair Social Choice Rules under Single-Peaked Preferences," Papers 2207.07984, arXiv.org.
    17. Erel Segal-Halevi & Shmuel Nitzan, 2019. "Fair cake-cutting among families," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(4), pages 709-740, December.
    18. Erel Segal-Halevi & Balázs R. Sziklai, 2019. "Monotonicity and competitive equilibrium in cake-cutting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(2), pages 363-401, September.
    19. Jung S. You & Ruben Juarez, 2021. "Incentive-compatible simple mechanisms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1569-1589, June.
    20. Sinan Ertemel & Rajnish Kumar, 2018. "Proportional rules for state contingent claims," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 47(1), pages 229-246, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

    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:2002.03174. 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.