IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2010.03025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Infinite-Dimensional Fisher Markets and Tractable Fair Division

Author

Listed:
  • Yuan Gao
  • Christian Kroer

Abstract

Linear Fisher markets are a fundamental economic model with applications in fair division as well as large-scale Internet markets. In the finite-dimensional case of $n$ buyers and $m$ items, a market equilibrium can be computed using the Eisenberg-Gale convex program. Motivated by large-scale Internet advertising and fair division applications, this paper considers a generalization of a linear Fisher market where there is a finite set of buyers and a continuum of items. We introduce generalizations of the Eisenberg-Gale convex program and its dual to this infinite-dimensional setting, which leads to Banach-space optimization problems. We establish existence of optimal solutions, strong duality, as well as necessity and sufficiency of KKT-type conditions. All these properties are established via non-standard arguments, which circumvent the limitations of duality theory in optimization over infinite-dimensional Banach spaces. Furthermore, we show that there exists a pure equilibrium allocation, i.e., a division of the item space. When the item space is a closed interval and buyers have piecewise linear valuations, we show that the Eisenberg-Gale-type convex program over the infinite-dimensional allocations can be reformulated as a finite-dimensional convex conic program, which can be solved efficiently using off-the-shelf optimization software based on primal-dual interior-point methods. Based on our convex conic reformulation, we develop the first polynomial-time cake-cutting algorithm that achieves Pareto optimality, envy-freeness, and proportionality. For general buyer valuations or a very large number of buyers, we propose computing market equilibrium using stochastic dual averaging, which finds approximate equilibrium prices with high probability. Finally, we discuss how the above results easily extend to the case of quasilinear utilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuan Gao & Christian Kroer, 2020. "Infinite-Dimensional Fisher Markets and Tractable Fair Division," Papers 2010.03025, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2010.03025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2010.03025
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. E. Eisenberg, 1961. "Aggregation of Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 337-350, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Nisan, Noam & Ronen, Amir, 2001. "Algorithmic Mechanism Design," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 166-196, April.
    4. Jerzy Legut, 2020. "How to obtain an equitable optimal fair division," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 284(1), pages 323-332, January.
    5. Jerzy Legut, 2017. "Optimal Fair Division for Measures with Piecewise Linear Density Functions," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(02), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Weller, Dietrich, 1985. "Fair division of a measurable space," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 5-17, February.
    7. Jain, Kamal & Vazirani, Vijay V., 2010. "Eisenberg-Gale markets: Algorithms and game-theoretic properties," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 84-106, September.
    8. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2015. "Repeated Auctions with Budgets in Ad Exchanges: Approximations and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 864-884, April.
    9. Christian Kroer & Alexander Peysakhovich, 2019. "Scalable Fair Division for 'At Most One' Preferences," Papers 1909.10925, arXiv.org.
    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. Yuan Gao & Christian Kroer & Alex Peysakhovich, 2021. "Online Market Equilibrium with Application to Fair Division," Papers 2103.12936, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    2. 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.
    3. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    4. Ashish Goel & Reyna Hulett & Benjamin Plaut, 2018. "Markets Beyond Nash Welfare for Leontief Utilities," Papers 1807.05293, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    5. Ji-Won Park & Jaeup U. Kim & Cheol-Min Ghim & Chae Un Kim, 2021. "The Boltzmann fair division for distributive justice," Papers 2109.11917, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    6. Segal-Halevi, Erel & Nitzan, Shmuel & Hassidim, Avinatan & Aumann, Yonatan, 2017. "Fair and square: Cake-cutting in two dimensions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 1-28.
    7. 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.
    8. Andrew Yang & Bruce Changlong Xu & Ivan Villa-Renteria, 2021. "Matching Markets," Papers 2109.14850, arXiv.org.
    9. Cheung, Yun Kuen & Cole, Richard & Devanur, Nikhil R., 2020. "Tatonnement beyond gross substitutes? Gradient descent to the rescue," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 295-326.
    10. Light, Bar & Weintraub, Gabriel, 2018. "Mean Field Equilibrium: Uniqueness, Existence, and Comparative Statics," Research Papers 3731, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    11. Santiago R. Balseiro & Ozan Candogan & Huseyin Gurkan, 2021. "Multistage Intermediation in Display Advertising," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 714-730, May.
    12. Radzvilas, Mantas, 2016. "Hypothetical Bargaining and the Equilibrium Selection Problem in Non-Cooperative Games," MPRA Paper 70248, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. 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.
    14. Ying-Ju Chen, 2017. "Optimal Dynamic Auctions for Display Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 897-913, August.
    15. Xiaohui Bei & Xinhang Lu & Warut Suksompong, 2021. "Truthful Cake Sharing," Papers 2112.05632, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.
    16. Xiayan Cheng & Rongheng Li & Yunxia Zhou, 0. "Tighter price of anarchy for selfish task allocation on selfish machines," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-32.
    17. Thorsten Hens & Beate Pilgrim & Janos Mayer, "undated". "Existence of Sunspot Equilibria and Uniqueness of Spot Market Equilibria: The Case of Intrinsically Complete Markets," IEW - Working Papers 188, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Jason Rhuggenaath & Alp Akcay & Yingqian Zhang & Uzay Kaymak, 2022. "Setting Reserve Prices in Second-Price Auctions with Unobserved Bids," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 2950-2967, November.
    19. Lilia Maliar & Serguei Maliar, 2005. "An Analytical Construction Of Constantinides¿ Social Utility Function," Working Papers. Serie AD 2005-25, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    20. Edward E. Schlee, 2001. "The Value of Information in Efficient Risk-Sharing Arrangements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 509-524, June.

    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:2010.03025. 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.