Abstract:We consider the problem of dividing limited resources to individuals arriving over T rounds. Each round has a random number of individuals arrive, and individuals can be characterized by their type (i.e., preferences over the different resources). A standard notion of fairness in this setting is that an allocation simultaneously satisfy envy-freeness and efficiency. The former is an individual guarantee, requiring that each agent prefers the agent's own allocation over the allocation of any other; in contrast, efficiency is a global property, requiring that the allocations clear the available resources. For divisible resources, when the number of individuals of each type are known up front, the desiderata are simultaneously achievable for a large class of utility functions. However, in an online setting when the number of individuals of each type are only revealed round by round, no policy can guarantee these desiderata simultaneously, and hence, the best one can do is to try and allocate so as to approximately satisfy the two properties. We show that, in the online setting, the two desired properties (envy-freeness and efficiency) are in direct contention in that any algorithm achieving additive counterfactual envy-freeness up to a factor of L T necessarily suffers an efficiency loss of at least 1/LT . We complement this uncertainty principle with a simple algorithm, G uarded- H ope , which allocates resources based on an adaptive threshold policy and is able to achieve any fairness–efficiency point on this frontier. Our results provide guarantees for fair online resource allocation with high probability for multiple resource and multiple type settings. In simulation results, our algorithm provides allocations close to the optimal fair solution in hindsight, motivating its use in practical applications as the algorithm is able to adapt to any desired fairness efficiency trade-off. Funding: This work was supported by the National Science Foundation [Grants ECCS-1847393, DMS-1839346, CCF-1948256, and CNS-1955997] and the Army Research Laboratory [Grant W911NF-17-1-0094]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.2022.2397.

Fair and Useful Cohort Selection

Fairness Under Composition

Algorithms and Learning for Fair Portfolio Design

Enforcing Group Fairness in Algorithmic Decision Making: Utility Maximization Under Sufficiency

Designing Equitable Algorithms

Fairness in Matching under Uncertainty

On Socially Fair Low-Rank Approximation and Column Subset Selection

Learning Fair Policies for Multi-stage Selection Problems from Observational Data

Beyond Submodularity: A Unified Framework of Randomized Set Selection with Group Fairness Constraints

Candidate Selections with Proportional Fairness Constraints

Entrofy Your Cohort: A Data Science Approach to Candidate Selection

Fairness through awareness

Fair Allocation through Selective Information Acquisition

Unfairness Despite Awareness: Group-Fair Classification with Strategic Agents

Social Choice for Heterogeneous Fairness in Recommendation

Long-Term Fairness in Sequential Multi-Agent Selection with Positive Reinforcement

Sequential Fair Allocation: Achieving the Optimal Envy-Efficiency Trade-off Curve

Fair Column Subset Selection

Group-level Fairness Maximization in Online Bipartite Matching

Fairness and Efficiency in Online Class Matching

On the Advantages of Distinguishing Between Predictive and Allocative Fairness in Algorithmic Decision-Making