IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2601.20035.html

Obviously Strategy-Proof Multi-Dimensional Allocation and the Value of Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Quitz'e Valenzuela-Stookey

Abstract

A principal must allocate a set of heterogeneous tasks (or objects) among multiple agents. The principal has preferences over the allocation. Each agent has preferences over which tasks they are assigned, which are their private information. The principal is constrained by the fact that each agent has the right to demand some status-quo task assignment. I characterize the conditions under which the principal can gain by delegating some control over the assignment to the agents. Within a large class of delegation mechanisms, I then characterize those that are obviously strategy-proof (OSP), and provide guidance for choosing among OSP mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Quitz'e Valenzuela-Stookey, 2026. "Obviously Strategy-Proof Multi-Dimensional Allocation and the Value of Choice," Papers 2601.20035, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2601.20035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.20035
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hart, Sergiu & Nisan, Noam, 2019. "Selling multiple correlated goods: Revenue maximization and menu-size complexity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 991-1029.
    2. Shapley, Lloyd & Scarf, Herbert, 1974. "On cores and indivisibility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 23-37, March.
    3. Pavlov Gregory, 2011. "Optimal Mechanism for Selling Two Goods," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-35, February.
    4. Alvin E. Roth, 2007. "Repugnance as a Constraint on Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 37-58, Summer.
    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. Hylland, Aanund & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1979. "The Efficient Allocation of Individuals to Positions," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(2), pages 293-314, April.
    7. Narges Ahani & Tommy Andersson & Alessandro Martinello & Alexander Teytelboym & Andrew C. Trapp, 2021. "Placement Optimization in Refugee Resettlement," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 1468-1486, September.
    8. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta & David C. Parkes & Richard Steinberg, 2024. "Combinatorial Auctions in Practice," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(2), pages 517-553, June.
    9. Yves Breitmoser & Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2022. "Obviousness around the clock," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 483-513, April.
    10. Thanassoulis, John, 2004. "Haggling over substitutes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 217-245, August.
    11. Manelli, Alejandro M. & Vincent, Daniel R., 2006. "Bundling as an optimal selling mechanism for a multiple-good monopolist," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 1-35, March.
    12. Nikhil Agarwal & Charles Hodgson & Paulo Somaini, 2025. "Choices and Outcomes in Assignment Mechanisms: The Allocation of Deceased Donor Kidneys," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 93(2), pages 395-438, March.
    13. David Delacrétaz & Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym, 2023. "Matching Mechanisms for Refugee Resettlement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(10), pages 2689-2717, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Shengwu Li, 2017. "Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3257-3287, November.
    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. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Mishra, Debasis, 2022. "Selling two identical objects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    2. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Ori Heffetz & Clayton Thomas, 2022. "Strategyproofness-Exposing Descriptions of Matching Mechanisms," Papers 2209.13148, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    3. Nikhil Agarwal & Eric Budish, 2021. "Market Design," NBER Working Papers 29367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2024. "Multidimensional screening after 37 years," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    5. Filip Tokarski, 2026. "Targeting Without Transfers," Papers 2602.00487, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2026.
    6. Fragiadakis, Daniel E. & Troyan, Peter, 2019. "Designing mechanisms to focalize welfare-improving strategies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 232-252.
    7. 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).
    8. Troyan, Peter, 2024. "(Non-)obvious manipulability of rank-minimizing mechanisms," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Sergiu Hart & Noam Nisan, 2025. "The Root of Revenue Continuity," Papers 2507.15735, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2026.
    10. Ivan Balbuzanov & Maciej H. Kotowski, 2019. "Endowments, Exclusion, and Exchange," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(5), pages 1663-1692, September.
    11. Miralles, Antonio & Pycia, Marek, 2021. "Foundations of pseudomarkets: Walrasian equilibria for discrete resources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Condorelli, Daniele, 2013. "Market and non-market mechanisms for the optimal allocation of scarce resources," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 582-591.
    13. Shende, Priyanka & Purohit, Manish, 2023. "Strategy-proof and envy-free mechanisms for house allocation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Th`anh Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym & Shai Vardi, 2025. "Efficiency, Envy, and Incentives in Combinatorial Assignment," Papers 2509.13198, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    15. Piotr Dworczak & Scott Duke Kominers & Mohammad Akbarpour, 2021. "Redistribution Through Markets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(4), pages 1665-1698, July.
    16. Sergiu Hart & Noam Nisan, 2013. "Selling Multiple Correlated Goods: Revenue Maximization and Menu-Size Complexity (old title: "The Menu-Size Complexity of Auctions")," Papers 1304.6116, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2018.
    17. Ezzat Elokda & Saverio Bolognani & Andrea Censi & Florian Dörfler & Emilio Frazzoli, 2024. "A Self-Contained Karma Economy for the Dynamic Allocation of Common Resources," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 578-610, July.
    18. Tierney, Ryan, 2019. "The problem of multiple commons: A market design approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1-27.
    19. Yannai A. Gonczarowski & Clayton Thomas, 2022. "Structural Complexities of Matching Mechanisms," Papers 2212.08709, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    20. Hart, Sergiu & Nisan, Noam, 2019. "Selling multiple correlated goods: Revenue maximization and menu-size complexity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 991-1029.

    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:2601.20035. 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.