IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2604.06105.html

Lexicographic Robustness and the Efficiency of Optimal Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Ashwin Kambhampati

Abstract

A central challenge in mechanism design is to identify mechanisms whose performance is robust under uncertainty about the environment. The maxmin optimality criterion is commonly used for this purpose, but it often yields a large and economically uninformative set of mechanisms. This paper proposes a lexicographic approach to refining the maxmin criterion and characterizes the efficiency of optimal mechanisms. In canonical screening and auction environments, the strongest refinement $\unicode{x2013}$ proper robustness $\unicode{x2013}$ selects ex post efficient mechanisms. By contrast, in a public good provision environment, it identifies the precise form of optimal inefficiencies, which become severe in large economies.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashwin Kambhampati, 2026. "Lexicographic Robustness and the Efficiency of Optimal Mechanisms," Papers 2604.06105, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2604.06105
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.06105
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manski, Charles F., 1986. "Ordinal Utility Models Of Decision Making Under Uncertainty," SSRI Workshop Series 292682, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Social Systems Research Institute.
    2. John Riley & Richard Zeckhauser, 1983. "Optimal Selling Strategies: When to Haggle, When to Hold Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(2), pages 267-289.
    3. Matthias Ehrgott, 2005. "Multicriteria Optimization," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-27659-3, January.
    4. George J. Mailath & Andrew Postlewaite, 1990. "Asymmetric Information Bargaining Problems with Many Agents," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 57(3), pages 351-367.
    5. van Damme, E.E.C., 1983. "Refinements of the Nash Equilibrium Concept," Other publications TiSEM 116b3ec4-be4d-48c2-ad1b-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. 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. Frank Yang & Kai Hao Yang, 2025. "Multidimensional Monotonicity and Economic Applications," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2428, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    3. Schmitz, Patrick W. & Sliwka, Dirk, 1998. "Die Bedeutung von privater Information für Vertragsbeziehungen zwischen Käufern und Verkäufern," MPRA Paper 6941, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Mishra, Debasis, 2022. "Selling two identical objects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    5. Frank Yang & Kai Hao Yang, 2025. "Multidimensional Monotonicity and Economic Applications," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2428R1, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2024. "Multidimensional screening after 37 years," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    7. Menicucci, Domenico & Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2015. "On the optimality of pure bundling for a monopolist," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 33-42.
    8. Jiangtao Li & Piotr Dworczak, 2020. "Are simple mechanisms optimal when agents are unsophisticated?," GRAPE Working Papers 42, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    9. Vijay Krishna & Motty Perry, 1997. "Efficient Mechanism Design," Game Theory and Information 9703010, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 28 Apr 1998.
    10. Frank Yang & Kai Hao Yang, 2025. "Multidimensional Monotonicity and Economic Applications," Papers 2502.18876, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2025.
    11. Hellwig, Martin F., 2007. "The provision and pricing of excludable public goods: Ramsey-Boiteux pricing versus bundling," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 511-540, April.
    12. Ian Ball & Deniz Kattwinkel, 2019. "Probabilistic Verification in Mechanism Design," Papers 1908.05556, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    13. Nima Haghpanah & Aditya Kuvalekar & Elliot Lipnowski, 2024. "Buying from a Group," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(8), pages 2596-2632, August.
    14. Ledyard, John O. & Palfrey, Thomas R., 2007. "A general characterization of interim efficient mechanisms for independent linear environments," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 441-466, March.
    15. Serkan Kucuksenel, 2012. "Interim efficient auctions with interdependent valuations," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 83-93, May.
    16. David Martimort & Lars Stole, 2024. "Menu Auctions Under Asymmetric Information," Working Papers hal-04784955, HAL.
    17. Peter Norman, 2004. "Efficient Mechanisms for Public Goods with Use Exclusions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 71(4), pages 1163-1188.
    18. , R. & , D., 2011. "A simple status quo that ensures participation (with application to efficient bargaining)," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(1), January.
    19. Chen, Yi-Chun & Li, Jiangtao, 2018. "Revisiting the foundations of dominant-strategy mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 294-317.
    20. Ian Ball & Deniz Kattwinkel, 2019. "Probabilistic Verification in Mechanism Design," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_124, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.

    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:2604.06105. 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: https://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.