Abstract:We consider the problem of a designer who wants to allocate resources to representatives, that then distribute the resources they receive among the individuals they represent. Motivated by the way Feeding America, one of the largest U.S. charities, allocates donations to food banks, which then further distribute the donations to food-insecure individuals, we focus on mechanisms that use artificial currencies. We compare auctions through the lens of the Price of Anarchy, with respect to three canonical welfare objectives: utilitarian social welfare (sum of individuals' utilities), Nash social welfare (product of individuals' utilities), and egalitarian social welfare (minimum of individuals' utilities). We prove strong lower bounds on the Price of Anarchy of all auctions that allocate each item to the highest bidder, subject to a mild technical constraint; this includes Feeding America's current auction, the First-Price auction. In sharp contrast, our main result shows that adapting the classic Trading Post mechanism of Shapley and Shubik to this setting, and coupled with Feeding America's choice of budget rule (each representative gets an amount of artificial currency equal to the number of individuals it represents), achieves a small Price of Anarchy for all generalized $p$-mean objectives simultaneously. Our bound on the Price of Anarchy of the Trading Post mechanism depends on $\ell$: the product of the rank and the ``incoherence'' of the underlying valuation matrix, which together capture a notion of how ``spread out'' the values of a matrix are. This notion has been extremely influential in the matrix completion literature, and, to the best of our knowledge, has never been used in auction theory prior to our work. Perhaps surprisingly, we prove that the dependence on $\ell$ is necessary: the Price of Anarchy of the Trading Post mechanism is $\Omega(\sqrt{\ell})$.

Envy freedom and prior-free mechanism design

On the Interplay between Incentive Compatibility and Envy Freeness

Almost Envy-free Repeated Matching in Two-sided Markets

Prior-free Dynamic Mechanism Design With Limited Liability

The Price of Prior Dependence in Auctions

Mechanism Design and Risk Aversion

Mechanism Design via Consensus Estimates, Cross Checking, and Profit Extraction

Fairness and efficiency in strategy-proof object allocation mechanisms

A New Approach to Auctions and Resilient Mechanism Design

Optimal Mechanism Design with Risk-loving Agents

First-Choice Maximality Meets Ex-ante and Ex-post Fairness

Mechanism Design with Possibilistic Beliefs.

Beyond Worst-Case Budget-Feasible Mechanism Design

Approximately Optimal Mechanism Design: Motivation, Examples, and Lessons Learned

Position Fair Mechanisms Allocating Indivisible Goods

Mechanism Design with Delegated Bidding

Sequential Posted Pricing and Multi-parameter Mechanism Design

Robust Mechanisms for Risk-Averse Sellers

Randomized Strategyproof Mechanisms with Best of Both Worlds Fairness and Efficiency

Distributionally Robust Optimal Auction Design under Mean Constraints

Mechanism Design with Set-Theoretic Beliefs