arXiv Science⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.28213

Subjective Valuations Make It Hard to be Fair: The Complexity of Resource Allocation to Groups of Agents

Abstract

We study the parameterized complexity of finding an EF1 allocation of indivisible items in the group-sharing setting, which has received increasing attention in recent years. There, items are not allocated to individual agents but rather to one of two (or possibly more) groups, and agents within that group all share the assigned items. We consider both the "fixed" (EF1-Fix) and "variable" (EF1-Var) group cases, where in the former the assignments of agents to groups are prescribed. While both are NP-hard in the classical sense, we show that their algorithmic behavior differs significantly from the parameterized perspective. As our main results, we: (1) prove that both cases are NP-hard even when the number of agents is a small constant; (2) circumvent this hardness by establishing fixed-parameter tractability for EF1-Var w.r.t. the number of "subjective" items, that is, items which are viewed as chores or goods by different agents---but rule out an analogous result for EF1-Fix; and (3) establish fixed-parameter tractability for EF1-Fix w.r.t. the number of item types, but link the existence of an analogous fixed-parameter algorithm for EF1-Var to a fundamental open question in the setting of Integer Linear Programming.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Argyrios Deligkas, Eduard Eiben, Robert Ganian, Tiger-Lily Goldsmith, Marlene Gründel, Simon Wietheger. 2026-10-20. Subjective Valuations Make It Hard to be Fair: The Complexity of Resource Allocation to Groups of Agents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.28213

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Matching Markets: Equilibrium Computation, Indivisible Goods, and Positional Externalities

Matching markets provide a mathematical framework for allocating scarce resources among strategic agents with heterogeneous preferences. While matching without money relies on ordinal stability and Pareto efficiency, Fisher and Arrow--Debreu markets mediate allocation through budgets and market-clearing prices. In this paper, we study the convex-analytic foundations, computational complexity, and external-utility extensions of Fisher matching markets. First, we formulate fractional resource allocation and linear Fisher markets via Fenchel conjugate duality and the Karush--Kuhn--Tucker (KKT) conditions of the Eisenberg--Gale convex program, showing how budget-weighted Nash social welfare characterizes competitive equilibria across linear and homothetic utility families. Second, we review topological existence via Sperner's lemma alongside polynomial-time combinatorial algorithms for divisible markets, including the Devanur--Papadimitriou--Saberi--Vazirani (DPSV) primal-dual max-flow algorithm and Orlin's strongly polynomial scaling algorithm. Third, we contrast the tractability of divisible markets with the $\mathsf{NP}$-hardness and $\mathsf{PPAD}$-completeness of indivisible Fisher markets and Competitive Equilibrium from Equal Incomes (CEEI), comparing $\varepsilon$-approximate equilibria, CEEI-FRAC, and Budish's Approximate CEEI mechanism. Finally, we analyze Fisher markets with positional (snob-effect) externalities, where buyer $i$'s utility for good $j$ scales with her relative share $(x_{ij}/\sum_{k} x_{kj})^{α_i}$ for $α_i > 0$. We prove that positional utility summands are convex on the nonnegative orthant, so utilitarian social welfare is maximized at exclusive corner allocations, whereas decentralized price-taking admits a unique budget-proportional equilibrium in single-good snob markets with a Price of Anarchy of $n^α$ among $n$ symmetric buyers.

cs.GT↗

Achieving Pareto Optimality in Games via Single-bit Feedback

Efficient coordination in multi-agent systems often incurs high communication overhead or slow convergence rates, making scalable welfare optimization difficult. We propose Single-Bit Coordination Dynamics for Pareto-Efficient Outcomes (SBC-PE), a decentralized learning algorithm requiring only a single-bit satisfaction signal per agent each round. Despite this extreme efficiency, SBC-PE guarantees convergence to the exact optimal solution in arbitrary finite games. We establish explicit regret bounds, showing expected regret grows only logarithmically with the horizon, i.e., O(log T). Compared with prior payoff-based or bandit-style rules, SBC-PE uniquely combines minimal signaling, general applicability, and finite-time guarantees. These results show scalable welfare optimization is achievable under minimal communication constraints.

cs.GT↗

Continuation-Adjusted Full-Support Indifference in a Feedback Stackelberg Attacker--Defender Attrition Game

Successful attacks that remove assets break two familiar static regularities: coverage need not deter attack, and the defender need not push coverage until its budget or an individual target saturates. We analyse a finite-horizon attacker--defender attrition game under a stagewise feedback-recommitment strong Stackelberg equilibrium. Our central result is a continuation adjustment that converts each state--period node into a static security game with shifted payoffs. At feasible full-support nodes, coverage remains indexed by one scalar attacker value, so backward induction uses scalar interval and endpoint calculations; boundary-support nodes require conditional linear programmes. Continuation losses can reverse an attacker's coverage swing, making a covered asset more attractive because it survives for later attacks. A three-asset, two-period instance is solved globally for every discount factor. It exhibits an exact singular threshold at which the optimal set expands, the selected policy jumps, and the defender abandons a previously protected asset and leaves budget unused with no target saturated, although both players' values remain continuous.

cs.GT↗