IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2506.07162.html

Delegation with Costly Inspection

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammad T. Hajiaghayi
  • Piotr Krysta
  • Mohammad Mahdavi
  • Suho Shin

Abstract

We study the problem of delegated choice with inspection cost (DCIC), which is a variant of the delegated choice problem by Kleinberg and Kleinberg (EC'18) as well as an extension of the Pandora's box problem with nonobligatory inspection (PNOI) by Doval (JET'18). In our model, an agent may strategically misreport the proposed element's utility, unlike the standard delegated choice problem which assumes that the agent truthfully reports the utility for the proposed alternative. Thus, the principal needs to inspect the proposed element possibly along with other alternatives to maximize its own utility, given an exogenous cost of inspecting each element. Further, the delegation itself incurs a fixed cost, thus the principal can decide whether to delegate or not and inspect by herself. We show that DCIC indeed is a generalization of PNOI where the side information from a strategic agent is available at certain cost, implying its NP-hardness by Fu, Li, and Liu (STOC'23). We first consider a costless delegation setting in which the cost of delegation is free. We prove that the maximal mechanism over the pure delegation with a single inspection and an PNOI policy without delegation achieves a $3$-approximation for DCIC with costless delegation, which is further proven to be tight. These results hold even when the cost comes from an arbitrary monotone set function, and can be improved to a $2$-approximation if the cost of inspection is the same for every element. We extend these techniques by presenting a constant factor approximate mechanism for the general setting for rich class of instances.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammad T. Hajiaghayi & Piotr Krysta & Mohammad Mahdavi & Suho Shin, 2025. "Delegation with Costly Inspection," Papers 2506.07162, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2506.07162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.07162
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Armstrong & John Vickers, 2010. "A Model of Delegated Project Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 213-244, January.
    2. Bengt Holmstrom, 1980. "On The Theory of Delegation," Discussion Papers 438, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    3. Manelli, Alejandro M. & Vincent, Daniel R., 2012. "Multidimensional mechanism design: Revenue maximization and the multiple-good monopoly. A corrigendum," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(6), pages 2492-2493.
    4. Doval, Laura, 2018. "Whether or not to open Pandora's box," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 127-158.
    5. Eilat, Ran & Pauzner, Ady, 2021. "Bilateral trade with a benevolent intermediary," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(4), November.
    6. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    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. Hedyeh Beyhaghi & Linda Cai, 2023. "Recent Developments in Pandora's Box Problem: Variants and Applications," Papers 2308.12242, arXiv.org.
    2. Mohammad T. Hajiaghayi & Suho Shin, 2025. "Algorithmic Delegated Choice: An Annotated Reading List," Papers 2508.06562, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2025.
    3. Ziv Scully & Laura Doval, 2024. "Local hedging approximately solves Pandora's box problems with nonobligatory inspection," Papers 2410.19011, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    4. Pak Hung Au & Mark Whitmeyer, 2018. "Attraction versus Persuasion: Information Provision in Search Markets," Papers 1802.09396, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    5. Petrikaitė, Vaiva, 2022. "Escaping search when buying," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. Rafael P. Greminger, 2022. "Optimal Search and Discovery," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3904-3924, May.
    7. Mohammad Reza Aminian & Vahideh Manshadi & Rad Niazadeh, 2025. "Markovian Search with Ex-Ante Constraints: Theory and Applications to Socially Aware Algorithmic Hiring," Papers 2501.13346, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    8. Manuel Mueller-Frank & Mallesh M. Pai, 2016. "Social Learning with Costly Search," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 83-109, February.
    9. Julien Grenet & YingHua He & Dorothea Kübler, 2022. "Preference Discovery in University Admissions: The Case for Dynamic Multioffer Mechanisms," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(6), pages 1427-1476.
    10. Maxey, Tyler, 2024. "School choice with costly information acquisition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 248-268.
    11. Mark Armstrong, 2017. "Ordered Consumer Search," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(5), pages 989-1024.
    12. Noda, Shunya, 2022. "Strategic experimentation with random serial dictatorship," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 115-125.
    13. Gretschko, Vitali & Simon, Jasmina, 2024. "An efficient dynamic mechanism with covert information acquisition," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-081, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Rustamdjan Hakimov & Dorothea Kübler & Siqi Pan, 2023. "Costly information acquisition in centralized matching markets," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(4), pages 1447-1490, November.
    15. Dellis, Arnaud, 2023. "Legislative informational lobbying," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    16. Chen, Yanbin & Li, Sanxi & Lin, Kai & Yu, Jun, 2021. "Consumer search with blind buying," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 402-427.
    17. Wanchang Zhang, 2022. "Auctioning Multiple Goods without Priors," Papers 2204.13726, arXiv.org.
    18. Carol Gao & Jorge Vásquez, 2025. "Optimal policing with (and without) criminal search," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 29(2), pages 213-244, June.
    19. MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi & Keivan Rezaei & Suho Shin, 2023. "Delegating to Multiple Agents," Papers 2305.03203, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    20. Greminger, Rafael, 2019. "Optimal Search and Awareness Expansion," Other publications TiSEM ac47e6ff-42a4-4d70-addd-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    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:2506.07162. 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.