IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2205.00825.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Stochastic Online Fisher Markets: Static Pricing Limits and Adaptive Enhancements

Author

Listed:
  • Devansh Jalota
  • Yinyu Ye

Abstract

Fisher markets are one of the most fundamental models for resource allocation. However, the problem of computing equilibrium prices in Fisher markets typically relies on complete knowledge of users' budgets and utility functions and requires transactions to happen in a static market where all users are present simultaneously. Motivated by these practical considerations, we study an online variant of Fisher markets, wherein users with privately known utility and budget parameters, drawn i.i.d. from a distribution, arrive sequentially. In this setting, we first study the limitations of static pricing algorithms, which set uniform prices for all users, along two performance metrics: (i) regret, i.e., the optimality gap in the objective of the Eisenberg-Gale program between an online algorithm and an oracle with complete information, and (ii) capacity violations, i.e., the over-consumption of goods relative to their capacities. Given the limitations of static pricing, we design adaptive posted-pricing algorithms, one with knowledge of the distribution of users' budget and utility parameters and another that adjusts prices solely based on past observations of user consumption, i.e., revealed preference feedback, with improved performance guarantees. Finally, we present numerical experiments to compare our revealed preference algorithm's performance to several benchmarks.

Suggested Citation

  • Devansh Jalota & Yinyu Ye, 2022. "Stochastic Online Fisher Markets: Static Pricing Limits and Adaptive Enhancements," Papers 2205.00825, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2205.00825
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.00825
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William C. Brainard & Herbert E. Scarf, 2005. "How to Compute Equilibrium Prices in 1891," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 57-83, January.
    2. Yuan Gao & Christian Kroer & Alex Peysakhovich, 2021. "Online Market Equilibrium with Application to Fair Division," Papers 2103.12936, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    3. Varian, Hal R., 1976. "Two problems in the theory of fairness," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 249-260.
    4. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    5. Kaneko, Mamoru & Nakamura, Kenjiro, 1979. "The Nash Social Welfare Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 423-435, March.
    6. Varian, Hal R., 1974. "Equity, envy, and efficiency," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 63-91, September.
    7. Zizhuo Wang & Shiming Deng & Yinyu Ye, 2014. "Close the Gaps: A Learning-While-Doing Algorithm for Single-Product Revenue Management Problems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(2), pages 318-331, April.
    8. Shipra Agrawal & Zizhuo Wang & Yinyu Ye, 2014. "A Dynamic Near-Optimal Algorithm for Online Linear Programming," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(4), pages 876-890, August.
    9. Patrick Joyce, 1984. "The Walrasian Tâtonnement Mechanism and Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(3), pages 416-425, Autumn.
    10. Eric Budish, 2011. "The Combinatorial Assignment Problem: Approximate Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(6), pages 1061-1103.
    11. Michiel Blom & Sven O. Krumke & Willem E. de Paepe & Leen Stougie, 2001. "The Online TSP Against Fair Adversaries," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 138-148, May.
    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. Nikhil Garg & Ashish Goel & Benjamin Plaut, 2021. "Markets for public decision-making," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(4), pages 755-801, May.
    2. Ashish Goel & Reyna Hulett & Benjamin Plaut, 2018. "Markets Beyond Nash Welfare for Leontief Utilities," Papers 1807.05293, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    3. Simina Br^anzei & Fedor Sandomirskiy, 2019. "Algorithms for Competitive Division of Chores," Papers 1907.01766, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    4. Ortega, Josué, 2020. "Multi-unit assignment under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 15-24.
    5. Cole, Richard & Tao, Yixin, 2021. "On the existence of Pareto Efficient and envy-free allocations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    6. Susumu Cato, 2018. "Choice functions and weak Nash axioms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 22(3), pages 159-176, December.
    7. He, Yinghua & Li, Sanxi & Yan, Jianye, 2015. "Evaluating assignment without transfers: A market perspective," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 40-44.
    8. Luofeng Liao & Yuan Gao & Christian Kroer, 2022. "Statistical Inference for Fisher Market Equilibrium," Papers 2209.15422, arXiv.org.
    9. Ioannis Caragiannis & David Kurokawa & Herve Moulin & Ariel D. Procaccia & Nisarg Shah & Junxing Wang, 2016. "The Unreasonable Fairness of Maximum Nash Welfare," Working Papers 2016_08, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    10. Hoang, Lê Nguyên & Soumis, François & Zaccour, Georges, 2016. "Measuring unfairness feeling in allocation problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 138-147.
    11. Moshe Babaioff & Noam Nisan & Inbal Talgam-Cohen, 2021. "Competitive Equilibrium with Indivisible Goods and Generic Budgets," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 382-403, February.
    12. Siddharth Barman & Sanath Kumar Krishnamurthy & Rohit Vaish, 2018. "Greedy Algorithms for Maximizing Nash Social Welfare," Papers 1801.09046, arXiv.org.
    13. Th`anh Nguyen & Alexander Teytelboym & Shai Vardi, 2023. "Dynamic Combinatorial Assignment," Papers 2303.13967, arXiv.org.
    14. Luofeng Liao & Christian Kroer, 2024. "Statistical Inference and A/B Testing in Fisher Markets and Paced Auctions," Papers 2406.15522, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    15. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Pérez-Castrillo, David & Wettstein, David, 2012. "Egalitarian equivalence under asymmetric information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 413-423.
    16. Rodrigo A. Velez, 2017. "Equitable rent division," Working Papers 20170818-001, Texas A&M University, Department of Economics.
    17. Sandomirskiy, Fedor & Ushchev, Philip, 2024. "The geometry of consumer preference aggregation," CEPR Discussion Papers 19100, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Bara, Zoltán, 1998. "A tisztességes elosztás mikroökonómiai elmélete [The microeconomic theory of fair distribution]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 558-575.
    19. Sprumont, Yves, 2018. "Belief-weighted Nash aggregation of Savage preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 222-245.
    20. Marc Fleurbaey, 2006. "To Envy or to be Envied? Refinements of No-Envy fot the Compensation Problem," IDEP Working Papers 0603, Institut d'economie publique (IDEP), Marseille, France, revised Jul 2006.

    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:2205.00825. 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.