Balanced Fair Division for Three Agents under General Valuations and Laminar Constraints

Max Dupr\'{e} la Tour

Balanced Fair Division for Three Agents under General Valuations and Laminar Constraints

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read For three agents, any set of preferences admits a balanced allocation that is envy-free up to one good and one chore; monotone valuations upgrade this to balanced envy-freeness up to one item.

desk verdict Resolves an explicit open problem in balanced fair division with a genuinely new topological transfer argument; the proof is long and AI-assisted, but the logic holds up and the paper deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.09437 v1 pith:D7KWLGV6 submitted 2026-08-10 cs.GT

Max Dupré la Tour This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.GT MSC 91B3255M2005B35

keywords balancedfairdivisionenvy-freeuptoonegoodandchoreindivisibleitemslaminarmatroidtopologicalmethodsequivarianttopologyHall'stheoremthreeagents

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Three agents are special: the paper proves that every instance with three agents and arbitrary real-valued set valuations admits a balanced allocation that is envy-free up to one good and one chore ($\mathrm{EF1}^c_g$): for each envy comparison, one item may be deleted from the envying bundle and one from the envied bundle. When every valuation is monotone (extra items only help, or only hurt), the relaxation collapses to ordinary balanced envy-freeness up to one item ($\mathrm{EF1}$), a guarantee previously known only for two agents or for additive valuations. The same topological machinery handles nested feasibility constraints: under a common laminar matroid, whenever a complete feasible allocation exists, there is one that is balanced, envy-free up to two goods and two chores, and differs by at most two items within every laminar set. The proof is nonconstructive, so the result is an existence theorem rather than an algorithm; without monotonicity, the stronger balanced $\mathrm{EF1}$ guarantee can fail even when all agents share the same valuation.

What carries the argument

The engine is a three-agent topological transfer theorem. It takes a finite simplicial complex whose vertices are ordered labeled partitions (bundle labels, not yet assigned to agents) and whose simplices are locally close—any two partitions in a common simplex differ by at most $q$ deletions and $q$ additions in each bundle—and cyclically invariant under relabeling. If the complex is connected and simply connected, then for arbitrary valuations some vertex's bundles can be assigned to the agents to form an $\mathrm{EF}q^c_g$ allocation. The proof encodes each agent's acceptable labels through upper and lower $q$-deletion envelopes; a Hall-obstruction map sends each simplex to a convex set of possible label averages, and if fairness failed everywhere, radial projection would produce a symmetry-preserving map from the complex to the sphere $S(W_3)$, which an equivariant obstruction theorem forbids when the complex is simply connected. The applications are the balanced-partition complex $X_{\mathrm{bal}}(M)$, shown connected and simply connected for every finite item set with the delicate $|M|=3k+1$ case handled by direct-transfer edges and canonical triangles, and the laminar complex $K_L$, assembled from three- and six-item gadgets whose local moves and commuting swaps give connectedness and simple connectivity.

What would settle it

Exhaustively search all three-agent instances on small item sets (say four or five items with values from a finite grid) for a balanced allocation that fails $\mathrm{EF}1^c_g$; Theorem 1 predicts none exists, so one true counterexample would refute it. A more surgical check targets Lemma 4: compute the fundamental group of the balanced-partition complex for item sets of size 4, 7, and 10—any loop that cannot be shrunk would invalidate the lemma and collapse the topological proof.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the space of all ordered balanced partitions of a finite item set into three bundles is topologically simple—connected and simply connected—and this simplicity alone forces a balanced $\mathrm{EF1}^c_g$ allocation no matter how the three agents value the items. For monotone nondecreasing or nonincreasing valuations this becomes balanced $\mathrm{EF1}$, which earlier work had left open for three agents. The same transfer argument, applied to a complex built from local gadget states, yields a complete feasible balanced $\mathrm{EF2}^c_g$ allocation under a common laminar matroid whenever complete feasible allocations exist. The paper also claims the one-good–one-chore relaxation is essential: a nine-item instance with identical nonmonotone valuations has no balanced $\mathrm{EF1}$ allocation at all.

Load-bearing premise

Both positive theorems rest on the claim that the space of all balanced labeled allocations (and, in the laminar case, the space of all feasible gadget allocations) is connected and has no holes; if that space contained a non-contractible loop, the topological step that forces fairness would fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every three-agent instance with arbitrary real-valued valuations admits a balanced allocation that is envy-free up to one good and one chore; bundle sizes differ by at most one.
For monotone nondecreasing or monotone nonincreasing valuations, the same theorem yields ordinary balanced EF1, settling the three-agent case of the known open problem.
Without monotonicity, balanced EF1 cannot be guaranteed even for identical valuations; the nine-item red/blue construction shows the one-good–one-chore relaxation is necessary.
Under a common laminar matroid, whenever a complete feasible allocation exists, arbitrary valuations admit a complete feasible balanced EF2^c_g allocation, and within every laminar set the three agents' item counts differ by at most two.
The transfer principle makes future constrained-fairness questions into connectivity questions: any cyclically invariant, simply connected, locally close allocation complex yields the corresponding EFq^c_g guarantee for three agents.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Pith inference: The transfer principle is a template but not yet a general theorem. Extending it to four agents would require a new complex, because the paper's appendix shows the natural balanced-partition complex has nonzero second homology; a four-agent proof would likely need a different space or a different group action.
Pith inference: The nine-item counterexample is purely combinatorial, since all agents share one valuation, so constructing an analogous red/blue instance for four agents—possibly even with monotone valuations—is a natural stress test of where the three-agent phenomenon ends.
Pith inference: The laminar theorem leaves sharpness open: whether the per-set discrepancy of two can be improved to one under monotone valuations, or whether some instance forces the gap. The gadget decomposition suggests the bound may be tight, but the paper does not settle tightness.
Pith inference: Because the guarantee comes from an equivariant obstruction theorem, it is existential. A practical next step the paper does not address is whether a balanced EF1^c_g allocation can be found in polynomial time in the value-oracle model, perhaps by turning the topological search into a combinatorial local-search algorithm.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is the real thing. It settles the three-agent balanced EF1 problem that Suksompong, Barman et al., and Cookson et al. all left open, and it does so with a stronger statement: balanced EF1c_g for arbitrary valuations, not just monotone ones. The nine-item counterexample for balanced EF1 without monotonicity is clean and easy to verify. The laminar matroid result is a substantial bonus, giving balanced EF2c_g under a common laminar constraint.

What the paper does well: the proof strategy is coherent and, unusually for this area, the topological machinery actually does the work rather than being decorative. The Hall-obstruction lemma, the reduction of envy-freeness to acceptable labels, and the application of Dold's theorem are all clearly explained. The connectivity proofs for the balanced partition complex and the laminar gadget complex are detailed and honest. I checked the delicate |M|=3k+1 case of Lemma 4 and the auxiliary-partition adiacency arguments in the way the stress-test note describes, and I did not find a concrete gap. The appendix is also a plus: it explicitly explains why the approach is three-agent-specific, and the conclusion straightforwardly states that the existence proofs are non-constructive.

The real soft spots are verification risk and complexity. The paper is long, the proofs are intricate, and the authors disclose that GPT-5.6 was used to generate most proofs. That disclosure is not itself a flaw—the intellectual content still has to be checked—but it raises the bar for independent verification, and no machine-checked formalization is provided. A second human referee with topological combinatorics expertise should be assigned, and the case analysis in Lemmas 3, 4, and 8 needs to be read slowly. The existential nature of the results is a limitation but it is stated clearly, not hidden. The citation pattern looks appropriate, including the author's prior work with Igarashi, which this paper builds on rather than merely cites.

Who it is for: anyone working on constrained fair division, approximate envy-freeness, or topological methods in combinatorial game theory. It is a serious result and deserves a serious referee, not a desk rejection. I would bring it to reading group and I would cite it if I wrote in this area.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies balanced allocations of indivisible items for three agents. Its main positive result, Theorem 1, states that every three-agent instance with arbitrary real-valued set valuations admits a balanced EF1^c_g allocation; Corollary 1 derives balanced EF1 for the special case in which every valuation is monotone nondecreasing or monotone nonincreasing. The paper also gives a counterexample (Theorem 2) showing that without monotonicity balanced EF1 can fail even for identical valuations, and it proves a laminar-matroid result (Theorem 3): whenever a complete feasible allocation exists under a common laminar matroid constraint, there is a complete feasible allocation that is balanced and EF2^c_g, with an additional approximate-balance guarantee inside every laminar set. The proof method is topological: a Hall-type obstruction is converted into an equivariant map to a sphere (Lemma 1), acceptable labels are connected to EFq^c_g via Lemma 2, and Dold's theorem is applied to a connected and simply connected allocation complex (Theorem 5). The paper then proves the required simple connectivity for the balanced-partition complex X_bal(M) (Lemma 4) and for the laminar gadget complex K_L (Lemma 8), and it includes an appendix explaining why the proof is specific to three agents.

Significance. If the results are correct, they resolve a previously open problem on balanced EF1 for three agents with monotone valuations, strengthen prior approximation results for subadditive valuations, and extend the reach of topological methods to balanced fair division under constraints. The paper is self-contained: the Hall-obstruction transfer principle is a reusable framework, the connectivity proofs for X_bal(M) and K_L are explicit and detailed, and the counterexample for nonmonotone valuations is clean and easy to verify. The manuscript also gives a concrete explanation, via the non-2-connectivity of X_{4,2} in the appendix, of why the three-agent case is special. The main residual risk is the length and complexity of the proofs and the fact that they are not machine-formalized; this is a verification concern rather than a detected mathematical error. I found no load-bearing gap in the central argument.

minor comments (4)

[Section 4.1, Lemma 3, relation 3 table] In the table for the pattern case 1213, the proposed vertex R with pattern 1123 is not adjacent to Q: for bundle 2, Q contains items b and d while R contains only c, so bundle 2 loses two items and gains one. The correct pattern is 1132, meaning a and b in bundle 1, d in bundle 2, and c in bundle 3; with this replacement, R is adjacent to all four vertices of the commuting square. Please fix the table (and Figure 1 if it displays the same pattern).
[Section 3, Lemma 2 proof] In the displayed inequality chain for the common-acceptable-label argument, the notation loses the distinction between the upper and lower q-deletion envelopes. The intended statement is \overline{v}^q_i(Q_{r*}) ≥ v_i(C) ≥ \underline{v}^q_i(P*_{r*}) ≥ t_i(Q), using the upper envelope of Q_{r*} and the lower envelope of P*_{r*}. The current rendering, with the same symbol v^q_i everywhere, is misleading because the first inequality is false for the lower envelope.
[Section 4.2, Lemma 4, simple-connectivity proof] The symbol P_a is used both for the a-th bundle of an arbitrary partition P and for the canonical partition P_a constructed from the fixed partition (C_1,C_2,C_3) and the distinguished item x_0. This overloading makes the paragraph on canonical edges and transportation by transpositions harder to follow; please introduce a distinct notation, for example \widetilde P_a for the canonical partitions.
[Section 6.2, Lemma 8] In the proof of simple connectivity, after an edge in a local simplex is replaced by a path in G_H, the argument relies on the fact that the full local simplex on V_H is a simplex of K_L and hence contains that path. This is immediate from condition (a) of the definition of K_L, but stating it explicitly would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims are derived from in-paper combinatorial-topology lemmas, not from fitted inputs or self-citation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Theorem 1 follows by applying the three-agent topological transfer theorem (Theorem 5) to the flag complex X_bal(M); Theorem 5 is proved in Section 3 from Lemma 1 (Hall-obstruction map), Lemma 2 (common acceptable labels), and the external Dold theorem. The required connectivity and simple connectivity of X_bal(M) are proved directly in Section 4 via Lemmas 3 and 4, using explicit edge-path homotopies and the transposition presentation of the symmetric group; no step of that proof assumes the fairness conclusion or uses a fitted parameter. Theorem 3 similarly follows from the explicit gadget decomposition in Lemmas 5-8, whose only external input is the stated assumption that a complete feasible allocation exists. Theorem 2 is an explicit counterexample with a constructed valuation. The only self-citation, to Dupré la Tour and Igarashi (2026), appears in comparisons and motivation; it is not load-bearing for any theorem here, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The GPT-5.6 provenance statement concerns proof generation rather than mathematical input and is not a circularity. Thus no pattern of self-definition, fitted-input-called-prediction, self-citation-load-bearing, or renaming is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted to data; the only parameters are the fairness slack q, equal to 1 or 2, which is part of the theorem statements. The proof introduces dummy items and marked pairs as combinatorial gadgets, but these are internal constructions rather than independent postulates. The central claims rest on standard theorems such as Hall's theorem and Dold's theorem, plus the explicitly stated laminar feasibility assumption.

assumptions (7)

standard math Dold's theorem (Theorem 4)
Used in Theorem 5 to rule out the equivariant map arising from a Hall obstruction; cited to Dold (1983).
standard math Hall's marriage theorem
Used in Lemma 1 to equate existence of an SDR with the barycenter lying in Q_sigma; cited to Hall (1935).
standard math Transposition presentation of the symmetric group with relations t_ab^2 = 1, braid relation, and disjoint commutation
Used in Lemma 3 to contract swap loops in the fixed-profile complex X_s.
standard math The barycentric subdivision homeomorphism |sdK| to |K| is equivariant with respect to simplicial group actions
Used in Lemma 1 to transfer the closest-point map from |sdK| to |K|.
standard math Laminar families with capacities define matroids
Gives the feasibility structure for Theorem 3; the paper states this in Section 6 without proof.
domain assumption If a complete feasible allocation exists under the laminar matroid, then |S| <= 3 b(S) for every S in L
Derived from the existence hypothesis in Theorem 3 and used in Lemma 6 to prove feasibility of gadget allocations.
domain assumption A complete feasible allocation exists for the common laminar matroid
Explicit hypothesis of Theorem 3.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Balanced Fair Division for Three Agents under General Valuations and Laminar Constraints." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D7KWLGV6

@misc{pith2026260809437,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Balanced Fair Division for Three Agents under General Valuations and Laminar Constraints},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D7KWLGV6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.09437}
}

abstract

We study fair allocations of indivisible items under general set valuations. We prove that every instance with three agents and arbitrary real-valued valuations admits a balanced allocation that is envy-free up to one good and one chore (EF$1^c_g$). This directly implies balanced EF$1$ when each valuation is either monotone nondecreasing or monotone nonincreasing. We also show that balanced EF$1$ cannot be guaranteed without monotonicity: there exists an instance with three agents, nine items, and identical nonmonotone valuations that admits no balanced EF$1$ allocation. We then consider a common laminar matroid constraint. Whenever a complete feasible allocation exists, we prove that there is a complete feasible allocation that is balanced and envy-free up to two goods and two chores (EF$2^c_g$) for arbitrary valuations. The allocation can additionally be chosen so that the numbers of items from every laminar set assigned to the three agents differ by at most two. Most proofs in this paper were obtained using GPT-5.6. We subsequently verified the proofs for correctness and refined their exposition and arguments, also with the aid of GPT-5.6.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.09437 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Completed gadgets are set aside at the node, while only a small residue is passed upward. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

[1]

Journal of Political Economy , volume =

Budish, Eric , title =. Journal of Political Economy , volume =. 2011 , doi =

work page 2011
[2]

and Markakis, Evangelos and Mossel, Elchanan and Saberi, Amin , title =

Lipton, Richard J. and Markakis, Evangelos and Mossel, Elchanan and Saberi, Amin , title =. Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC) , pages =. 2004 , publisher =

work page 2004
[3]

, title =

Kyropoulou, Maria and Suksompong, Warut and Voudouris, Alexandros A. , title =. Theoretical Computer Science , volume =. 2020 , doi =

work page 2020
[4]

ACM SIGecom Exchanges , volume =

Suksompong, Warut , title =. ACM SIGecom Exchanges , volume =. 2021 , doi =

work page 2021
[5]

Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Cookson, Benjamin and Ebadian, Soroush and Shah, Nisarg , title =. Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2025 , doi =

work page 2025
[6]

Proceedings of the 40th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Kawase, Yasushi and Mahara, Ryoga , title =. Proceedings of the 40th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2026 , doi =

work page 2026
[7]

2026 , eprint =

Cookson, Benjamin and Shah, Nisarg and Verma, Paritosh , title =. 2026 , eprint =

work page 2026
[8]

Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Barman, Siddharth and Ebadian, Soroush and Latifian, Mohamad and Shah, Nisarg , title =. Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2025 , doi =

work page 2025

Show all 43 references

[9]

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , volume =

Liu, Shengxin and Lu, Xinhang and Suzuki, Mashbat and Walsh, Toby , title =. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , volume =. 2024 , doi =

2024
[10]

Approximately Envy-Free and Equitable Allocations of Indivisible Items for Non-Monotone Valuations , booktitle =

Bil. Approximately Envy-Free and Equitable Allocations of Indivisible Items for Non-Monotone Valuations , booktitle =. 2026 , doi =

2026
[11]

Almost Envy-Free Allocations with Connected Bundles , journal =

Bil. Almost Envy-Free Allocations with Connected Bundles , journal =. 2022 , doi =

2022
[12]

Proceedings of the 37th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Igarashi, Ayumi , title =. Proceedings of the 37th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2023 , doi =

2023
[13]

From Cake-Cutting and Necklace-Splitting to Fair Division of Indivisible Items , year =

Dupr. From Cake-Cutting and Necklace-Splitting to Fair Division of Indivisible Items , year =. 2608.04340 , archivePrefix =

arXiv
[14]

Simple Proofs of Some

Dold, Albrecht , editor =. Simple Proofs of Some. Proceedings of the Northwestern Homotopy Theory Conference , series =. 1983 , doi =

1983
[15]

Using the

Matou. Using the. 2008 , doi =

2008
[16]

Envy-Free Relaxations for Goods, Chores, and Mixed Items , journal =

B. Envy-Free Relaxations for Goods, Chores, and Mixed Items , journal =. 2024 , doi =

2024
[17]

Bhaskar, Umang and Sricharan, A. R. and Vaish, Rohit , title =. Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques (APPROX/RANDOM 2021) , series =. 2021 , publisher =

2021
[18]

Towards Envy-Freeness Relaxations for General Nonmonotone Valuations , booktitle =

Bhaskar, Umang and Kumar, Gunjan and Pandit, Yeshwant and. Towards Envy-Freeness Relaxations for General Nonmonotone Valuations , booktitle =. 2025 , publisher =

2025
[19]

Advances in Mathematics , volume =

Alon, Noga , title =. Advances in Mathematics , volume =. 1987 , doi =

1987
[20]

and Su, Francis Edward , title =

Simmons, Forest W. and Su, Francis Edward , title =. Mathematical Social Sciences , volume =. 2003 , doi =

2003
[21]

The American Mathematical Monthly , volume =

Su, Francis Edward , title =. The American Mathematical Monthly , volume =. 1999 , doi =

1999
[22]

SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics , volume =

Asada, Megumi and Frick, Florian and Pisharody, Vivek and Polevy, Maxwell and Stoner, David and Tsang, Ling Hei and Wellner, Zoe , title =. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics , volume =. 2018 , doi =

2018
[23]

Fair and Efficient Allocation of Indivisible Items under Category Constraints , journal =

Igarashi, Ayumi and Meunier, Fr. Fair and Efficient Allocation of Indivisible Items under Category Constraints , journal =. 2026 , doi =

2026
[24]

Barman, Siddharth and Vishwa Prakash, H. V. and Sethia, Aditi and Suzuki, Mashbat , title =. Web and Internet Economics (WINE 2025) , series =. 2026 , publisher =

2025
[25]

Proceedings of the 2026 Annual ACM--SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) , pages =

Mahara, Ryoga , title =. Proceedings of the 2026 Annual ACM--SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) , pages =. 2026 , publisher =

2026
[26]

Web and Internet Economics (WINE 2023) , series =

Bu, Xiaolin and Li, Zihao and Liu, Shengxin and Song, Jiaxin and Tao, Biaoshuai , title =. Web and Internet Economics (WINE 2023) , series =. 2024 , publisher =. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-48974-7_5 , eprint =

2023 doi
[27]

Games and Economic Behavior , volume =

Bogomolnaia, Anna and Baklanov, Artem and Victorova, Elizaveta , title =. Games and Economic Behavior , volume =. 2025 , doi =

2025
[28]

Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT 2025) , series =

Mancho, Alviona and Markakis, Evangelos and Protopapas, Nicos , title =. Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT 2025) , series =. 2026 , publisher =

2025
[29]

Proceedings of the 2026 Annual ACM--SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) , pages =

Barman, Siddharth and Verma, Paritosh , title =. Proceedings of the 2026 Annual ACM--SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA) , pages =. 2026 , publisher =

2026
[30]

White , title =

Neil L. White , title =. Linear Algebra and its Applications , volume =. 1980 , doi =

1980
[31]

2026 , eprint =

Matt Larson , title =. 2026 , eprint =

2026
[32]

Matroids Are Equitable , journal =

Hannaneh Akrami and Siyue Liu and Roshan Raj and L. Matroids Are Equitable , journal =. 2026 , doi =

2026
[33]

Epistemic Fair Division of Independence Structures , year =

Marcin Anholcer and Maciej Bartkowiak and Bart. Epistemic Fair Division of Independence Structures , year =. 2606.11494 , archivePrefix =

arXiv
[34]

Procaccia and Warut Suksompong , title =

Hoon Oh and Ariel D. Procaccia and Warut Suksompong , title =. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics , volume =. 2021 , doi =

2021
[35]

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , volume =

Amitay Dror and Michal Feldman and Erel Segal-Halevi , title =. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research , volume =. 2023 , doi =

2023
[36]

Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages =

Arpita Biswas and Siddharth Barman , title =. Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages =. 2018 , doi =. 1804.09521 , archivePrefix =

2018 arXiv
[37]

Achieving Rental Harmony with a Secretive Roommate , journal =

Florian Frick and Kelsey Houston-Edwards and Fr. Achieving Rental Harmony with a Secretive Roommate , journal =. 2019 , doi =

2019
[38]

Multilabeled Versions of Sperner's and Fan's Lemmas and Applications , journal =

Fr. Multilabeled Versions of Sperner's and Fan's Lemmas and Applications , journal =. 2019 , doi =

2019
[39]

Journal of the London Mathematical Society , volume =

Philip Hall , title =. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , volume =. 1935 , doi =

1935
[40]

Volovikov, A. Yu. , title =. Mathematical Notes , volume =. 1996 , doi =

1996
[41]

Fair Division under Laminar Matroid Constraints for Three Agents , author=. Proc. of the 25th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems , pages=
[42]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.14149 , year=

Dividing conflicting items fairly , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.14149 , year=

arXiv
[43]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04353 , year=

Fair Interval Scheduling of Indivisible Chores , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.04353 , year=

arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Journal of Political Economy , volume =

Budish, Eric , title =. Journal of Political Economy , volume =. 2011 , doi =

work page 2011

[2] [2]

and Markakis, Evangelos and Mossel, Elchanan and Saberi, Amin , title =

Lipton, Richard J. and Markakis, Evangelos and Mossel, Elchanan and Saberi, Amin , title =. Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC) , pages =. 2004 , publisher =

work page 2004

[3] [3]

, title =

Kyropoulou, Maria and Suksompong, Warut and Voudouris, Alexandros A. , title =. Theoretical Computer Science , volume =. 2020 , doi =

work page 2020

[4] [4]

ACM SIGecom Exchanges , volume =

Suksompong, Warut , title =. ACM SIGecom Exchanges , volume =. 2021 , doi =

work page 2021

[5] [5]

Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Cookson, Benjamin and Ebadian, Soroush and Shah, Nisarg , title =. Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2025 , doi =

work page 2025

[6] [6]

Proceedings of the 40th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Kawase, Yasushi and Mahara, Ryoga , title =. Proceedings of the 40th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2026 , doi =

work page 2026

[7] [7]

2026 , eprint =

Cookson, Benjamin and Shah, Nisarg and Verma, Paritosh , title =. 2026 , eprint =

work page 2026

[8] [8]

Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =

Barman, Siddharth and Ebadian, Soroush and Latifian, Mohamad and Shah, Nisarg , title =. Proceedings of the 39th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) , volume =. 2025 , doi =

work page 2025