IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2605.26604.html

Credibility Trilemma in Polymatroidal Service Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Lauri Lov'en
  • Sujit Gujar
  • Kalle Timperi
  • Hassan Mehmood
  • Praveen Kumar Donta
  • Sasu Tarkoma
  • Schahram Dustdar

Abstract

Mechanism-mediated service markets with polymatroidal feasibility admit efficient, dominant-strategy incentive-compatible (DSIC) allocation, but these guarantees implicitly assume truthful execution by the marketplace operator. Modelling the operator as a strategic player, we establish a credibility trilemma: for single-parameter agents on a non-modular polymatroid, no static sealed-bid mechanism is simultaneously revenue-optimal, DSIC for agents, and credible for the operator. We introduce the Cost of Non-Credibility (CoNC) as a price-of-anarchy-style welfare-loss measure and obtain tight $\Theta$-bounds across five topology classes (single-edge, series, parallel, tree, series-parallel), plus a matching upper bound $O(|\mathcal{S}|)$ on general DAGs realised by an $\Omega(|\mathcal{S}|)$ witness on the SP-augmented sub-family, turning the trilemma into a structural quantity. Three structurally distinct resolutions follow: public broadcast or deferred-revelation commitment, administrative domain separation under settlement separation and four side conditions, and integrator competition orthogonal to mechanism execution under disjoint actors. An instance-level grounding over the edge-pricing market of Amin et al. confirms the trilemma's robustness on a refereed external setting. The result establishes marketplace neutrality as a first-order design constraint on polymatroidal service markets rather than an implementation detail: where the operator is a strategic player, credibility trades off against revenue optimality and agent incentive compatibility along structurally characterised lines.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauri Lov'en & Sujit Gujar & Kalle Timperi & Hassan Mehmood & Praveen Kumar Donta & Sasu Tarkoma & Schahram Dustdar, 2026. "Credibility Trilemma in Polymatroidal Service Markets," Papers 2605.26604, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.26604
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.26604
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2012. "Robust Mechanism Design," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robust Mechanism Design The Role of Private Information and Higher Order Beliefs, chapter 2, pages 49-96, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. McAfee, R. Preston, 1992. "A dominant strategy double auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 434-450, 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. Satterthwaite, Mark A. & Williams, Steven R. & Zachariadis, Konstantinos E., 2014. "Optimality versus practicality in market design: A comparison of two double auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 248-263.
    2. Baliga Sandeep & Vohra Rakesh, 2003. "Market Research and Market Design," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    4. Scott Fay & Robert Zeithammer, 2017. "Bidding for Bidders? How the Format for Soliciting Supplier Participation in NYOP Auctions Impacts Channel Profit," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4324-4344, December.
    5. Tafreshian, Amirmahdi & Masoud, Neda, 2022. "A truthful subsidy scheme for a peer-to-peer ridesharing market with incomplete information," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 130-161.
    6. Erlanson, Albin & Szwagrzak, Karol, 2013. "Strategy-Proof Package Assignment," Working Papers 2013:43, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    7. Jean-Michel Benkert, 2025. "Bilateral trade with loss-averse agents," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 79(2), pages 519-560, March.
    8. Wei He & Jiangtao Li & Weijie Zhong, 2024. "Rank-Guaranteed Auctions," Papers 2408.12001, arXiv.org.
    9. Brunner, Christoph & Hu, Audrey & Oechssler, Jörg, 2014. "Premium auctions and risk preferences: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 467-484.
    10. Müller, Christoph, 2020. "Robust implementation in weakly perfect Bayesian strategies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    11. Dirk Bergemann & Marek Bojko & Paul DŸtting & Renato Paes Leme & Haifeng Xu & Song Zuo, 2024. "Data-Driven Mechanism Design: Jointly Eliciting Preferences and Information," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2418, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    12. Obara Ichiro, 2008. "The Full Surplus Extraction Theorem with Hidden Actions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-28, March.
    13. Chen, Yi-Chun & Mueller-Frank, Manuel & Pai, Mallesh M., 2022. "Continuous implementation with direct revelation mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    14. Alexander Nesterov & Olga Rospuskova & Sofia Rubtcova, 2024. "Robustness to manipulations in school choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(3), pages 519-548, May.
    15. Pierpaolo Battigalli, 2006. "Rationalization In Signaling Games: Theory And Applications," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 67-93.
    16. Martimort, David & Semenov, Aggey, 2008. "The informational effects of competition and collusion in legislative politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(7), pages 1541-1563, July.
    17. Qin, Cheng-Zhong & Yang, Chun-Lei, 2009. "An Explicit Approach to Modeling Finite-Order Type Spaces and Applications," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt8hq7j89k, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    18. Martin Hellwig & Felix Bierbrauer, 2009. "Public Good Provision in a Large Economy," 2009 Meeting Papers 1062, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    19. Robert Kleinberg & Bo Waggoner & E. Glen Weyl, 2016. "Descending Price Optimally Coordinates Search," Papers 1603.07682, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2016.
    20. Kojevnikov, Denis & Song, Kyungchul, 2023. "Econometric inference on a large Bayesian game with heterogeneous beliefs," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 237(1).

    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:2605.26604. 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.