×

A self-contained karma economy for the dynamic allocation of common resources. (English) Zbl 07889785

Summary: This paper presents karma mechanisms, a novel approach to the repeated allocation of a scarce resource among competing agents over an infinite time. Examples include deciding which ride hailing trip requests to serve during peak demand, granting the right of way in intersections or lane mergers, or admitting internet content to a regulated fast channel. We study a simplified yet insightful formulation of these problems where at every instant two agents from a large population get randomly matched to compete over the resource. The intuitive interpretation of a karma mechanism is “If I give in now, I will be rewarded in the future.” Agents compete in an auction-like setting where they bid units of karma, which circulates directly among them and is self-contained in the system. We demonstrate that this allows a society of self-interested agents to achieve high levels of efficiency without resorting to a (possibly problematic) monetary pricing of the resource. We model karma mechanisms as dynamic population games and guarantee the existence of a stationary Nash equilibrium. We then analyze the performance at the stationary Nash equilibrium numerically. For the case of homogeneous agents, we compare different mechanism design choices, showing that it is possible to achieve an efficient and ex-post fair allocation when the agents are future aware. Finally, we test the robustness against agent heterogeneity and propose remedies to some of the observed phenomena via karma redistribution.

MSC:

91B32 Resource and cost allocation (including fair division, apportionment, etc.)
91B03 Mechanism design theory
91A25 Dynamic games

References:

[1] Balseiro, SR; Gurkan, H.; Sun, P., Multiagent mechanism design without money, Oper Res, 67, 5, 1417-1436, 2019 · Zbl 1455.91122
[2] Berge, C., Topological spaces: including a treatment of multi-valued functions, vector spaces, and convexity, 1997, Mineola NY: Dover Publications, Mineola NY
[3] Berkes, F., Local-level management and the commons problem: A comparative study of turkish coastal fisheries, Mar Policy, 10, 3, 215-229, 1986
[4] Bertsekas, D., Dynamic programming and optimal control, 2007, Belmont MA: Athena Scientific, Belmont MA
[5] Börjesson, M.; Fosgerau, M.; Algers, S., On the income elasticity of the value of travel time, Transp Res Part A Policy Pract, 46, 2, 368-377, 2012
[6] Bourreau, M.; Kourandi, F.; Valletti, T., Net neutrality with competing internet platforms, J Ind Econ, 63, 1, 30-73, 2015
[7] Brands, DK; Verhoef, ET; Knockaert, J.; Koster, PR, Tradable permits to manage urban mobility: market design and experimental implementation, Transp Res Part A Policy Pract, 137, 34-46, 2020
[8] Budish, E., The combinatorial assignment problem: approximate competitive equilibrium from equal incomes, J Polit Econ, 119, 6, 1061-1103, 2011
[9] Budish, E.; Cantillon, E., The multi-unit assignment problem: theory and evidence from course allocation at harvard, Am Econ Rev, 102, 5, 2237-71, 2012
[10] Cachon, GP; Daniels, KM; Lobel, R., The role of surge pricing on a service platform with self-scheduling capacity, Manuf Serv Oper Manag, 19, 3, 368-384, 2017
[11] Cappelen, AW; Konow, J.; Sørensen, EØ; Tungodden, B., Just luck: an experimental study of risk-taking and fairness, Am Econ Rev, 103, 4, 1398-1413, 2013
[12] Castillo JC, Knoepfle D, Weyl G (2017) Surge pricing solves the wild goose chase. In: ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pp 241-242
[13] Censi A, Bolognani S, Zilly JG, Mousavi SS, Frazzoli E (2019) Today me, tomorrow thee: efficient resource allocation in competitive settings using karma games. In: IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC), pp 686-693
[14] Clarke, EH, Multipart pricing of public goods, Public Choice, 11, 1, 17-33, 1971
[15] Dholakia UM (2015) Everyone hates Uber’s surge pricing - here’s how to fix it . https://hbr.org/2015/12/everyone-hates-ubers-surge-pricing-heres-how-to-fix-it
[16] Dutta, PK, A folk theorem for stochastic games, J Econ Theory, 66, 1, 1-32, 1995 · Zbl 0835.90139
[17] Elokda E, Censi A, Bolognani S (2021) Dynamic population games. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.14662
[18] Friedman EJ, Halpern JY, Kash I (2006) Efficiency and Nash equilibria in a scrip system for P2P networks. In: ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp 140-149
[19] Friedman, JW, A non-cooperative equilibrium for supergames, Rev Econ Stud, 38, 1, 1-12, 1971 · Zbl 0274.90072
[20] Fudenberg, D.; Levine, DK, An approximate folk theorem with imperfect private information, J Econ Theory, 54, 1, 26-47, 1991 · Zbl 0744.90115
[21] Fudenberg, D.; Maskin, E., The folk theorem in repeated games with discounting or with incomplete information, Econometrica, 54, 3, 533-554, 1986 · Zbl 0615.90099
[22] Fudenberg, D.; Levine, DK; Maskin, E., The folk theorem with imperfect public information, Econometrica, 62, 5, 997-1039, 1994 · Zbl 0819.90137
[23] Gale, D.; Shapley, LS, College admissions and the stability of marriage, Am Math Month, 69, 1, 9-15, 1962 · Zbl 0109.24403
[24] Gibbard, A., Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result, Econometrica, 41, 4, 587-601, 1973 · Zbl 0325.90081
[25] Golle P, Leyton-Brown K, Mironov I, Lillibridge M (2001) Incentives for sharing in peer-to-peer networks. In: International Workshop on Electronic Commerce, Springer, pp 75-87 · Zbl 1060.68682
[26] Gorokh, A.; Banerjee, S.; Iyer, K., From monetary to nonmonetary mechanism design via artificial currencies, Math Oper Res, 46, 3, 835-855, 2021 · Zbl 1471.91200
[27] Granas, A.; James, D., Fixed point theory, 2003, New York NY: Springer, New York NY · Zbl 1025.47002
[28] Groves, T., Incentives in teams, Econometrica, 41, 4, 617-631, 1973 · Zbl 0311.90002
[29] Guo Y, Hörner J (2020) Dynamic allocation without money. TSE Working Paper
[30] Hahn, RW; Wallsten, S., The economics of net neutrality, Econ Voice, 3, 6, 2006
[31] Hylland, A.; Zeckhauser, R., The efficient allocation of individuals to positions, J Polit Econ, 87, 2, 293-314, 1979
[32] Jackson, MO; Sonnenschein, HF, Overcoming incentive constraints by linking decisions, Econometrica, 75, 1, 241-257, 2007 · Zbl 1201.91036
[33] Johnson, K.; Simchi-Levi, D.; Sun, P., Analyzing scrip systems, Oper Res, 62, 3, 524-534, 2014 · Zbl 1307.91127
[34] Kim, J.; Li, M.; Xu, M., Organ donation with vouchers, J Econ Theory, 191, 105-159, 2021 · Zbl 1458.91146
[35] Krishna, V., Auction theory, 2009, Burlington MA: Academic Press, Burlington MA
[36] Moulin, H., On strategy-proofness and single peakedness, Public Choice, 35, 4, 437-455, 1980
[37] Net Neutrality - President Obama’s plan for a free and open internet (2016). https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/net-neutrality
[38] Nisan, N.; Roughgarden, T.; Tardos, E.; Vazirani, VV, Algorithmic game theory, 2007, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge · Zbl 1130.91005
[39] O’Flaherty, WD, Karma and Rebirth in classical indian traditions, 1980, Berkeley CA: University of California Press, Berkeley CA
[40] Okuno-Fujiwara, M.; Postlewaite, A., Social norms and random matching games, Games Econ behav, 9, 1, 79-109, 1995 · Zbl 0829.90143
[41] Ostrom, E., Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action, 1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
[42] Pil Choi, J.; Kim, B-C, Net neutrality and investment incentives, RAND J Econ, 41, 3, 446-471, 2010
[43] Prendergast, C., The allocation of food to food banks, J Polit Econ, 130, 8, 1993-2017, 2022
[44] Roberts, KW, Interpersonal comparability and social choice theory, Rev Econ Stud, 47, 2, 421-439, 1980 · Zbl 0432.90009
[45] Rudin, W., Principles of mathematical analysis, 1976, New York NY: McGraw-Hill, New York NY · Zbl 0346.26002
[46] Salazar, M.; Paccagnan, D.; Agazzi, A.; Heemels, WM, Urgency-aware optimal routing in repeated games through artificial currencies, Eur J Control, 62, 22-32, 2021 · Zbl 1480.91035
[47] Sandholm, WH, Population games and evolutionary dynamics, 2010, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, Cambridge MA · Zbl 1208.91003
[48] Satterthwaite, MA, Strategy-proofness and Arrow’s conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions, J Econ Theory, 10, 2, 187-217, 1975 · Zbl 0315.90088
[49] Schummer J, Vohra RV (2007) Mechanism design without money. In: Algorithmic Game Theory, pp 243-299 · Zbl 1143.91317
[50] Shapley, L.; Scarf, H., On cores and indivisibility, J Math Econ, 1, 1, 23-37, 1974 · Zbl 0281.90014
[51] Shontell A, Moss C (2014) Uber denies text message that suggests it withheld cars ‘to make earnings higher’ on Valentine’s Day. https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-surge-pricing-text-2014-2?r=US &IR=T
[52] Sönmez, T.; Ünver, MU, Course bidding at business schools, Int Econ Rev, 51, 1, 99-123, 2010
[53] Sönmez, T.; Ünver, MU; Yenmez, MB, Incentivized kidney exchange, Am Econ Rev, 110, 7, 2198-2224, 2020
[54] Spear, SE; Srivastava, S., On repeated moral hazard with discounting, Rev Econ Stud, 54, 4, 599-617, 1987 · Zbl 0639.90013
[55] Treves F (1967) Topological Vector Spaces. Distributions and Kernels. Academic Press, San Diego CA · Zbl 0171.10402
[56] Tychonoff, A., Über die topologische Erweiterung von Räumen, Math Ann, 102, 1, 544-561, 1930 · JFM 55.0963.01
[57] Vickrey, W., Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders, J Finance, 16, 1, 8-37, 1961
[58] Vishnumurthy V, Chandrakumar S, Sirer EG (2003) Karma: A secure economic framework for peer-to-peer resource sharing. In: Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-peer Systems
[59] Xiao, F.; Qian, ZS; Zhang, HM, Managing bottleneck congestion with tradable credits, Transp Res Part B Methodol, 56, 1-14, 2013
[60] Yang, H.; Wang, X., Managing network mobility with tradable credits, Transp Res Part B Methodol, 45, 3, 580-594, 2011
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.