IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.03439.html

Knowledge-Based Mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Yutong Zhang
  • Yangfan Zhou

Abstract

We study robust mechanisms when the designer possesses a Bayesian belief over some components of agents' private information but faces ambiguity over others. The designer evaluates mechanisms by their worst-case performance over all joint distributions consistent with her belief over the Bayesian components. The framework encompasses settings such as multidimensional delegation in which a principal knows the distribution of the state but not the agent's preferences (e.g., his tradeoffs across dimensions), screening in which a seller only has misspecified estimates of buyer preferences, and auction and voting design when agents' beliefs about each other are ambiguous to the designer. We provide conditions under which a \emph{knowledge-based} mechanism---one that conditions only on the Bayesian components but not the ambiguous ones---is robustly optimal. Our results unify earlier work across distinct economic environments and uncover new applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Yutong Zhang & Yangfan Zhou, 2026. "Knowledge-Based Mechanisms," Papers 2609.03439, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.03439
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.03439
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Milgrom & Ilya Segal, 2002. "Envelope Theorems for Arbitrary Choice Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 583-601, March.
    2. Chen, Yi-Chun & Li, Jiangtao, 2018. "Revisiting the foundations of dominant-strategy mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 294-317.
    3. Constantinos Daskalakis & Alan Deckelbaum & Christos Tzamos, 2017. "Strong Duality for a Multiple‐Good Monopolist," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 735-767, May.
    4. Alex Gershkov & Jacob K. Goeree & Alexey Kushnir & Benny Moldovanu & Xianwen Shi, 2013. "On the Equivalence of Bayesian and Dominant Strategy Implementation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 197-220, January.
    5. Yeon-Koo Che & Weijie Zhong, 2025. "Robustly Optimal Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 92(5), pages 2923-2951.
    6. Alexey Kushnir, 2013. "On the equivalence between Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation: the case of correlated types," ECON - Working Papers 129, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    7. Takuro Yamashita & Shuguang Zhu, 2022. "On the Foundations of Ex Post Incentive-Compatible Mechanisms," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 494-514, November.
    8. Deniz Kattwinkel & Axel Niemeyer & Justus Preusser & Alexander Winter, 2022. "Mechanisms without transfers for fully biased agents," Papers 2205.10910, arXiv.org.
    9. Songzi Du, 2018. "Robust Mechanisms Under Common Valuation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1569-1588, September.
    10. Benjamin Brooks & Songzi Du, 2021. "Optimal Auction Design With Common Values: An Informationally Robust Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 1313-1360, May.
    11. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2024. "Multidimensional screening after 37 years," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    12. Gabriel Carroll, 2012. "When Are Local Incentive Constraints Sufficient?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 661-686, March.
    13. Alexey Kushnir & Shuo Liu, 2019. "On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation for environments with nonlinear utilities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(3), pages 617-644, April.
    14. Piotr Dworczak & Alessandro Pavan, 2022. "Preparing for the Worst but Hoping for the Best: Robust (Bayesian) Persuasion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 2017-2051, September.
    15. Yeon‐Koo Che & Jinwoo Kim & Fuhito Kojima & Christopher Thomas Ryan, 2024. "“Near” Weighted Utilitarian Characterizations of Pareto Optima," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 92(1), pages 141-165, January.
    16. Lawrence Blume & Adam Brandenburger & Eddie Dekel, 2014. "Lexicographic Probabilities and Choice Under Uncertainty," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 6, pages 137-160, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Wei He & Jiangtao Li & Weijie Zhong, 2024. "Rank-Guaranteed Auctions," Papers 2408.12001, arXiv.org.
    2. Wanchang Zhang, 2022. "Robust Private Supply of a Public Good," Papers 2201.00923, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2022.
    3. Mark Whitmeyer, 2026. "Wherefore BIC = DIC?," Papers 2609.26223, arXiv.org.
    4. Satoshi Nakada & Shmuel Nitzan & Takashi Ui, 2025. "Robust Voting under Uncertainty," Papers 2507.22655, arXiv.org.
    5. Goeree, Jacob K. & Kushnir, Alexey, 2016. "Reduced form implementation for environments with value interdependencies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 250-256.
    6. Tommaso Denti & Doron Ravid, 2023. "Robust Predictions in Games with Rational Inattention," Papers 2306.09964, arXiv.org.
    7. Paul H. Edelman & John A. Weymark, 2021. "Dominant strategy implementability and zero length cycles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(4), pages 1091-1120, November.
    8. Tomoya Kazumura & Debasis Mishra & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2017. "Strategy-proof multi-object auction design: Ex-post revenue maximization with no wastage," Discussion Papers 17-03, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    9. Sun, Wuqin & Wang, Dazhong & Zhang, Yue, 2018. "Optimal profit sharing mechanisms with type-dependent outside options," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-66.
    10. James Peck & Jeevant Rampal, 2021. "Optimal Monopoly Mechanisms with Demand Uncertainty," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 1413-1429, November.
    11. Mishra, Debasis, 2016. "Ordinal Bayesian incentive compatibility in restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 925-954.
    12. Wanchang Zhang, 2022. "Auctioning Multiple Goods without Priors," Papers 2204.13726, arXiv.org.
    13. Laura Doval & Vasiliki Skreta, 2022. "Mechanism Design With Limited Commitment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(4), pages 1463-1500, July.
    14. Tilman Börgers, 2017. "(No) Foundations of dominant-strategy mechanisms: a comment on Chung and Ely (2007)," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 21(2), pages 73-82, June.
    15. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2020. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free clock auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    16. Xu Lang, 2023. "A Belief-Based Characterization of Reduced-Form Auctions," Papers 2307.04070, arXiv.org.
    17. Tim Roughgarden & Inbal Talgam-Cohen & Qiqi Yan, 2019. "Robust Auctions for Revenue via Enhanced Competition," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 1074-1094, July.
    18. Erya Yang, 2021. "Reduced-form mechanism design and ex post fairness constraints," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 9(2), pages 269-293, October.
    19. repec:upd:utmpwp:038 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kevin He & Fedor Sandomirskiy & Omer Tamuz, 2026. "Private Private Information," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 134(5), pages 1561-1606.
    21. He, Wei & Li, Jiangtao, 2022. "Correlation-robust auction design," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).

    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:2609.03439. 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.