1 / 25

CPS 196.2 Expressive negotiation over donations

CPS 196.2 Expressive negotiation over donations. Vincent Conitzer conitzer@cs.duke.edu. One donor (bidder). u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8. U = 1. Two independent donors. u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8. u( ) = 1

ursa-cook
Download Presentation

CPS 196.2 Expressive negotiation over donations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. CPS 196.2Expressive negotiation over donations Vincent Conitzer conitzer@cs.duke.edu

  2. One donor (bidder) u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 U = 1

  3. Two independent donors u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 U = 1 U = 1

  4. Two donors with a contract u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 U = .5 + .8 = 1.3 > 1 U = .5 + .8 = 1.3 > 1

  5. Contracting using matching offers u( ) = 1 I’ll match any donation to u( ) = 1.3

  6. Limitations of matching offers • One-sided • Involve only a single charity

  7. Two charities u( ) = 1 u( ) = .3 u( ) = .8 u( ) = 1 u( ) = .8 u( ) = .3 U = 1.1 U = 1.1

  8. A different approach • Donors can submit bidsindicating their preferences over charities • A center accepts all the bids and decides who pays what to whom

  9. What do we need? • A general bidding language for specifying “complex matching offers” (bids) • Algorithms for the clearing problem(given the bids, who pays what to whom)

  10. One charity • A bid for one charity: “Given that the charity ends up receiving a total of x (including my contribution), I am willing to contribute at most w(x)” Bidder’s maximum payment Budget w(x) x = total payment to charity

  11. Bid 1 maximum payment w(x) Budget $50 $30 $10 x = total payment $100 $10 $500

  12. Bid 2 maximum payment w(x) Budget $75 $45 $15 x = total payment $100 $10 $500

  13. Current solution w(x) 45 degree line $125 total payment bidders are willing to make $75 max donated $25 max surplus x = total payment $100 $10 $500 $43.75

  14. Tsunami event (Dagstuhl 05)

  15. Problem with more than one charity • Willing to give $1 for every $100 to UNICEF • Willing to give $2 for every $100 to Amnesty Int’l • BUDGET: $50 wa(xa) wu(xu) $50 $50 xa xu $2500 $5000 • Could get stuck paying $100! • Most general solution: w(x1, x2, …, xm) • Requires specifying exponentially many values

  16. Solution: separate utility and payment; assume utility decomposes • Willing to give $1 for every $100 to UNICEF • Willing to give $2 for every $100 to Amnesty Int’l • Budget constraint: $50 ua(xa) uu(xu) w(uu(xu)+ua(xa)) $50 1 util 1 util uu(xu)+ua(xa) 50 utils $100 xu $50 xa

  17. The general form of a bid (utils) (utils) u2(x2) u1(x1) um(xm) (utils) … x2 ($) x1 xm ($) ($) ($) w(u1(x1) + u2(x2)+ … + um(xm)) u1(x1) + u2(x2)+ … + um(xm) (utils)

  18. What to do with the bids? • Decide x1,x2,…,xm (total payment to each charity) • Decide y1,y2,…,yn (total payment by each bidder) • Sayx1,x2,…,xm ;y1,y2,…,yn is valid if • x1+x2 +… +xm ≤y1 +y2 +…+yn (no more money given away than collected) • For any bidder j, yj ≤wj(uj1(x1)+uj2(x2) + … +ujm(xm)) (nobody pays more than they wanted to) x1 y1 x2 y2

  19. Objective • Among valid outcomes, find one that maximizes • Total donated = x1+x2 +… +xm x1 y1 x2 y2 • Surplus = y1 +y2 +…+yn -x1 -x2 -… -xm x1 y1 x2 y2

  20. Avoiding indirect payments

  21. No payments to disliked charities

  22. Hardness of clearing • NP-complete to decide if there exists a solution with objective > 0 • That means: the problem is inapproximable to any ratio (unless P=NP)

  23. General program formulation • Maximize • x1+x2+… +xm , OR • y1+y2 +…+yn-x1-x2-… -xm • Subject to • y1+y2 +…+yn-x1-x2-… -xm≥ 0 • For all j: yj≤ wj(uj1+ uj2+ … + ujm) • For all i, j: uji≤ uji(xi) nonlinear nonlinear

  24. Concave piecewise linear constraints l2(x) l1(x) l3(x) b(x) x y ≤ l1(x) y ≤ b(x) y ≤ l2(x) y ≤ l3(x)

  25. Linear programming • So, if all the bids are concave… • All the uji are concave uji(xi) (utils) • All the wj are concave ($) xi wj(uj) ($) • Then the program is a linear program (solvable to optimality in polynomial time) • Even if they are not concave, can solve as MIP uj (utils)

More Related