IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2103.03403.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mechanism Design under Approximate Incentive Compatibility

Author

Listed:
  • Santiago Balseiro
  • Omar Besbes
  • Francisco Castro

Abstract

A fundamental assumption in classical mechanism design is that buyers are perfect optimizers. However, in practice, buyers may be limited by their computational capabilities or a lack of information, and may not be able to perfectly optimize. This has motivated the introduction of approximate incentive compatibility (IC) as an appealing solution concept for practical mechanism design. While most of the literature focuses on the analysis of particular approximate IC mechanisms, this paper is the first to study the design of optimal mechanisms in the space of approximate IC mechanisms and to explore how much revenue can be garnered by moving from exact to approximate incentive constraints. We study the problem of a seller facing one buyer with private values and analyze optimal selling mechanisms under $\varepsilon$-incentive compatibility. We establish that the gains that can be garnered depend on the local curvature of the seller's revenue function around the optimal posted price when the buyer is a perfect optimizer. If the revenue function behaves locally like an $\alpha$-power for $\alpha \in (1,\infty)$, then no mechanism can garner gains higher than order $\varepsilon^{\alpha/(2\alpha-1)}$. This improves upon state-of-the-art results which imply maximum gains of $\varepsilon^{1/2}$ by providing the first parametric bounds that capture the impact of revenue function's curvature on revenue gains. Furthermore, we establish that an optimal mechanism needs to randomize as soon as $\varepsilon>0$ and construct a randomized mechanism that is guaranteed to achieve order $\varepsilon^{\alpha/(2\alpha-1)}$ additional revenues, leading to a tight characterization of the revenue implications of approximate IC constraints. Our work brings forward the need to optimize not only over allocations and payments but also over best responses, and we develop a new framework to address this challenge.

Suggested Citation

  • Santiago Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Francisco Castro, 2021. "Mechanism Design under Approximate Incentive Compatibility," Papers 2103.03403, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2103.03403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.03403
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Milgrom & Ilya Segal, 2002. "Envelope Theorems for Arbitrary Choice Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 583-601, March.
    2. John Riley & Richard Zeckhauser, 1983. "Optimal Selling Strategies: When to Haggle, When to Hold Firm," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(2), pages 267-289.
    3. Manelli, Alejandro M. & Vincent, Daniel R., 2007. "Multidimensional mechanism design: Revenue maximization and the multiple-good monopoly," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 153-185, November.
    4. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2015. "Repeated Auctions with Budgets in Ad Exchanges: Approximations and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 864-884, April.
    5. Hamid Nazerzadeh & Amin Saberi & Rakesh Vohra, 2013. "Dynamic Pay-Per-Action Mechanisms and Applications to Online Advertising," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 98-111, February.
    6. Santiago R. Balseiro & Omar Besbes & Gabriel Y. Weintraub, 2019. "Dynamic Mechanism Design with Budget-Constrained Buyers Under Limited Commitment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 711-730, May.
    7. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    8. Paul Milgrom, 2011. "Critical Issues In The Practice Of Market Design," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 311-320, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ran Ben-Moshe & Sergiu Hart & Noam Nisan, 2022. "Monotonic Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods," Papers 2210.17150, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    2. Koessler, Frédéric & Skreta, Vasiliki, 2016. "Informed seller with taste heterogeneity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 456-471.
    3. Bergemann, Dirk & Castro, Francisco & Weintraub, Gabriel Y., 2020. "The scope of sequential screening with ex post participation constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    4. Alexandre Belloni & Changrong Deng & Saša Pekeč, 2017. "Mechanism and Network Design with Private Negative Externalities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 577-594, June.
    5. Mierendorff, Konrad, 2016. "Optimal dynamic mechanism design with deadlines," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 190-222.
    6. Pavlov Gregory, 2011. "Optimal Mechanism for Selling Two Goods," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-35, February.
    7. Mark Armstrong, 2016. "Nonlinear Pricing," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 583-614, October.
    8. Debasis Mishra & Kolagani Paramahamsa, 2022. "Selling to a principal and a budget-constrained agent," Discussion Papers 22-02, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    9. Pavlov Gregory, 2011. "A Property of Solutions to Linear Monopoly Problems," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, February.
    10. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Mishra, Debasis, 2022. "Selling two identical objects," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    11. Sergiu Hart & Noam Nisan, 2013. "Selling Multiple Correlated Goods: Revenue Maximization and Menu-Size Complexity (old title: "The Menu-Size Complexity of Auctions")," Papers 1304.6116, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2018.
    12. Briest, Patrick & Chawla, Shuchi & Kleinberg, Robert & Weinberg, S. Matthew, 2015. "Pricing lotteries," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 144-174.
    13. Hart, Sergiu & Nisan, Noam, 2019. "Selling multiple correlated goods: Revenue maximization and menu-size complexity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 991-1029.
    14. Chawla, Shuchi & Malec, David & Sivan, Balasubramanian, 2015. "The power of randomness in Bayesian optimal mechanism design," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 297-317.
    15. Yeon-Koo Che & Weijie Zhong, 2021. "Robustly Optimal Mechanisms for Selling Multiple Goods," Papers 2105.02828, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    16. Mishra, Debasis & Pramanik, Anup & Roy, Souvik, 2014. "Multidimensional mechanism design in single peaked type spaces," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 103-116.
    17. Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2024. "Multidimensional screening after 37 years," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    18. Shixin Wang, 2024. "Semi-Separable Mechanisms in Multi-Item Robust Screening," Papers 2408.13580, arXiv.org.
    19. Hart, Sergiu & Nisan, Noam, 2017. "Approximate revenue maximization with multiple items," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 313-347.
    20. Menicucci, Domenico & Hurkens, Sjaak & Jeon, Doh-Shin, 2015. "On the optimality of pure bundling for a monopolist," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 33-42.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2103.03403. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.