Skip to main content

Multiple Facility Location Games with Envy Ratio

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management (AAIM 2020)

Abstract

We study deterministic mechanism design without money for k-facility location games with envy ratio on a real line segment, where a set of strategic agents report their locations and a social planner locates k facilities for minimizing the envy ratio. The objective of envy ratio, which is defined as the maximum over the ratios between any two agents’ utilities, is derived from fair division to measure the fairness with respect to a certain facility location profile.

The problem is studied in two settings. In the homogeneous k-facility location game where k facilities serve the same purpose, we propose a \(\frac{2k}{2k-1}\)-approximate deterministic group strategyproof mechanism which is also the best deterministic strategyproof mechanism. In the heterogeneous k-facility location game where each facility serves a different purpose, when k is even, we devise the optimal and group strategyproof mechanism; when k is odd, we provide a \(\frac{k+1}{k-1}\)-approximate deterministic group strategyproof mechanism.

This research was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11971447, 11871442), the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province of China (ZR2019MA052) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (201964006).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Analogically, in the facility location setting, we can say agent i envies agent j if her cost is greater than j’s, or equivalently her utility is less than j’s. It seems that defining the envy ratio as the maximum over ratios between any two agents’ cost can also represent fairness. We simply follow the way of [6] and give the utility version of the envy ratio. Besides, we conjecture there might not exist any positive results for the cost version of the envy ratio, although without verification.

References

  1. Alon, N., Feldman, M., Procaccia, A.D., Tennenholtz, M.: Strategyproof approximation of the minimax on networks. Mathematics of Operations Research 35(3), 513–526 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Anastasiadis, E., Deligkas, A.: Heterogeneous Facility Location Games. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, 623–631 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cai, Q., Filos-Ratsikas, A., Filos, A., Tang, P.: Facility Location with Minimax Envy. In Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 137–143 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, X., Hu, X., Jia, X., Li, M., Tang, Z., Wang, C.: Mechanism design for two-opposite-facility location games with penalties on distance. In Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium, 256–260 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cheng, Y., Wu, W., Zhang, G.: Strategyproof approximation mechanisms for an obnoxious facility game on networks. Theoretical Computer Science 497, 154–163 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ding, Y., Liu, W., Chen, X., Fang Q., Nong, Q.: Facility location game with envy ratio. Working paper, Ocean University of China (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Duan, L., Li, B., Li, M., Xu, X.: Heterogenious two-facility location games with minimum distance requirement. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, 1461–1469 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feigenbaum, I., Sethuraman, J.: Strategyproof Mechanisms for One-Dimensional Hybrid and Obnoxious Facility Location Models. In Workshop on Incentive and Trust in E-Communities at the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 8–13 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Foley, D.: Resource allocation and the public sector. Yale Economics Essays 7, 45–98 (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fong, K., Li, M., Lu, P., Todo, T., Yokoo, T.: Facility lcation games with fractional preferences. In Proceedings of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1039–1046 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fotakis, D., Tzamos, C.: On the power of deterministic mechanisms for facility location games. ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation 2(4), Article 15 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Li, M., Mei, L., Xu, Y., Zhang, G., Zhao, Y.: Facility location games with externalities. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 1443–1451 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lipton, R., Markakis, E., Mossel, E., Saberi, A.: On approximately fair allocations of indivisible goods. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, 125–131 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lu, P., Wang, Y., Zhou, Y.: Tighter bounds for facility games. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics, 137–148 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lu, P., Sun, X., Wang, Y., Zhu, Z.: Asymptotically optimal strategy-proof mechanisms for two-facility games. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, 315–324 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mei, L., Li, M., Ye, D., Zhang, G.: Facility location games with distinct desires. Discrete Applied Mathematics 264, 148–160 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Moulin, H.: On strategy-proofness and single peakedness. Public Choice 35(4), 437–455 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Procaccia, A. D., Tennenholtz, M.: Approximate mechanism design without money. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, 177–186 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Schummer, J., Vohra, R.: Strategy-proof location on a network. Journal of Economic Theory 104(2), 405–428 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Serafino, P., Ventre, C.: Heterogeneous facility location without money. Theoretical Computer Science 636, 27–46 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Varian, H.: Equity, envy and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory 9, 63–91 (1974)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Yuan, H., Wang, K., Fong, K., Zhang, Y., Li, M.: Facility location games with optional preference. Proceedings of the Twenty-second European Conference on ArtificialIntelligence 1520–1527, (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Zhang, Qiang, Li, Minming: Strategyproof mechanism design for facility location games with weighted agents on a line. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization 28(4), 756–773 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-013-9598-8

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Zou, S., Li, M.: Facility location games with dual preference. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 615–623 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qizhi Fang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Liu, W., Ding, Y., Chen, X., Fang, Q., Nong, Q. (2020). Multiple Facility Location Games with Envy Ratio. In: Zhang, Z., Li, W., Du, DZ. (eds) Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management. AAIM 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12290. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57602-8_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57602-8_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-57601-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-57602-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics