Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Obvious Strategyproofness Needs Monitoring for Good Approximations

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1702.05640 v1 pith:C4USG7FP submitted 2017-02-18 cs.GT

classification cs.GT
keywords mechanismsagentsapproximationhoweverlimitationsmechanismmonitoringobvious
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Obvious strategyproofness (OSP) is an appealing concept as it allows to maintain incentive compatibility even in the presence of agents that are not fully rational, e.g., those who struggle with contingent reasoning [Li, 2015]. However, it has been shown to impose some limitations, e.g., no OSP mechanism can return a stable matching [Ashlagi and Gonczarowski, 2015]. We here deepen the study of the limitations of OSP mechanisms by looking at their approximation guarantees for basic optimization problems paradigmatic of the area, i.e., machine scheduling and facility location. We prove a number of bounds on the approximation guarantee of OSP mechanisms, which show that OSP can come at a significant cost. However, rather surprisingly, we prove that OSP mechanisms can return optimal solutions when they use monitoring -- a novel mechanism design paradigm that introduces a mild level of scrutiny on agents' declarations [Kovacs et al., 2015].

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools