arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.00122

When Maximum Nash Welfare Becomes Strongly Fair: Bi-valued Goods

Abstract

For the fair allocation of indivisible goods, the milestone work of Caragiannis et al. (2019) revolutionized the understanding of Maximum Nash Welfare (MNW) allocations by revealing their "unreasonable" ability to balance fairness (EF1) and efficiency (PO) for general additive functions. Subsequent work established that MNW allocations simultaneously satisfy EFX and GMMS (and consequently MMS and PMMS) for binary instances (Amanatidis et al. 2021 and Barman et al. 2018), and satisfy EFX for bi-valued instances (Amanatidis et al. 2021). In this paper, we revisit the (personalized) bi-valued instances and provide a tight characterization of the approximation guarantees of MNW allocations with respect to EFX, PMMS, and GMMS, showing that these guarantees are significantly stronger than what is known for general valuations. Furthermore, we demonstrate that even for the slightly more general setting of tri-valued instances, the fairness guarantees of MNW deteriorate significantly, which establishes a sharp boundary on the instances for which MNW allocations are strongly fair.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zehan Lin, Xiaowei Wu, Shengwei Zhou. 2026-09-09. When Maximum Nash Welfare Becomes Strongly Fair: Bi-valued Goods. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.00122

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Project Submission Games in Participatory Budgeting

We introduce the framework of project submission games, capturing the behavior of project proposers in participatory budgeting (and multiwinner elections). Here, each proposer submits a subset of project proposals, aiming at maximizing the total cost of those that get funded. We focus on finding conditions under which pure Nash equilibria (NE) exist in our games, and on the complexity of checking whether they exist. We also seek algorithms for computing best responses for the proposers

cs.GT↗

Domination-Avoiding Learning Agents Cannot Collude

An influential paper of Calvano et al. empirically demonstrated that Q-learning agents spontaneously collude when placed as sellers that compete on prices in a natural market model. More recent results of Fish et al. empirically demonstrated that similar collusion happens with commercial LLMs. We formally prove that such collusion can also happen with external-regret-minimizing agents. We identify a very general class of agents, which we term Domination-Avoiding agents, that provably do not collude in such markets. This class contains all Mean-Based agents and all internal-regret-minimizing agents, as well as others such as Multiplicative-Weight agents with variable learning rate and contextual variants thereof. More generally we show that, in any game, this class of agents is guaranteed to jointly learn to almost never play strategies that are eliminated by repeated elimination of purely dominated strategies.

cs.GT↗

Settling the Complexity of Hylland--Zeckhauser Equilibria

The Hylland--Zeckhauser (HZ) mechanism is a foundational framework for allocating indivisible goods in one-sided matching markets via lotteries supported by competitive prices and equal artificial budgets. We resolve the exact computational complexity of the HZ scheme by proving that computing an exact HZ equilibrium is FIXP-complete, thereby settling a conjecture of Vazirani and Yannakakis. Notably, this hardness persists even when computing the equilibrium allocation alone. We establish our hardness result via a reduction that encodes quadratic fixed-point equations into a reciprocal variational inequality. On the algorithmic side, we present a deterministic polynomial-time approximation algorithm that achieves an additive error of $0.0755211 + δ$ for any $δ> 0$, significantly improving upon the previous $1/e$ guarantee.

cs.GT↗