Is Shapley cost sharing optimal?

Shahar Dobzinski, Aranyak Mehta, Tim Roughgarden, Mukund Sundararajan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

A general approach to the design of budget-balanced cost-sharing mechanisms is to use the Shapley value, applied to the given cost function, to define payments from the players to the mechanism. Is the corresponding Shapley value mechanism "optimal" in some sense? We consider the objective of minimizing worst-case inefficiency subject to a revenue constraint, and prove results in three different regimes. First, for the public excludable good problem, the Shapley value mechanism minimizes the worst-case efficiency loss over all truthful, deterministic, and budget-balanced mechanisms that satisfy equal treatment. Second, even with randomization and approximate budget-balance allowed and dropping equal treatment, the worst-case efficiency loss of the Shapley value mechanism is within a constant factor of the minimum possible. Third, for no-deficit mechanisms, we prove a general positive result: for every monotone cost function, a suitable blend of the VCG and Shapley value mechanisms is no-deficit and enjoys good approximate efficiency guarantees. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)130-138
Number of pages9
JournalGames and Economic Behavior
Volume108
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2018

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Economics and Econometrics
  • Finance

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is Shapley cost sharing optimal?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this