arXiv subjects

Biaoshuai Tao

Publications and source records attributed to Biaoshuai Tao.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Computational Complexity of Strong and Average Justified Representation

We study the approval-based multiwinner election problem where a set of $n$ voters cast approval-based ballots to a set of $m$ candidates, and we are to select a winner committee consisting of $k$ candidates. We consider two axioms: strong justified representation (SJR) and average justified representation (AJR). A winner committee satisfies SJR if the satisfaction for each voter in every $\ell$-cohesive group is at least $\ell$. AJR is a weaker axiom that requires the average satisfaction for each $\ell$-cohesive group to be at least $\ell$. It is well known that a winner committee satisfying AJR may not exist (and neither does SJR). In this paper, we study the computational complexity of the following decision problem: given an approval-based multiwinner election instance, decide if there exists a winner committee satisfying SJR/AJR. We prove that this problem is $Θ_2^p$-complete for SJR, and $Σ_2^p$-complete for AJR. As byproducts, we derive some results that are interesting in their own right. Firstly, we show that adding one more adaptive query to an NP oracle on top of polynomially many non-adaptive NP queries does not add more computational power, and the resulting complexity class is still $Θ_2^p$. Secondly, we construct a set system that can be useful in other applications, especially when doing reductions from typical satisfiability problems such as 3SAT.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Auctions with Contract Design

We consider a new auction model where the bidders' utilities and the auctioneer's revenue depend on a quality factor of the transaction determined by costly and strategic investments of the bidders. Applications of our model include ad auctions, government concessions and crowdsourcing contests. Crucially, these quality-enhancing efforts made by the bidders are often sunk costs incurred prior to the allocation, creating a fundamental moral hazard problem where the risk of losing the auction discourages investments. In this paper, we study the design of revenue-maximizing contracts integrated into auctions: the auctioneer commits to a transfer rule that rewards the winner for the ex-post realized quality of the transaction to incentivize higher effort. Our new framework is a natural generalization of both the auction theory and the principal-agent model. We consider both the second-price and the first-price auctions. We show that natural symmetric Bayes Nash equilibria exist in both auctions. Assuming these natural equilibria are played by the bidders and the number of bidders is large, we study linear contracts and derive the optimal reward factor of the transfer rule that maximizes the auctioneer's revenue. As the main result, we show that the optimal reward factor converges to the auctioneer's marginal benefit from the quality, as the number of bidders grows. That is, it is optimal for the auctioneer to fully pass through the quality value to the winner. This observation is largely independent of the auction rule used: we derive a revenue equivalence theorem showing that the revenue remains the same as long as symmetric Bayes Nash equilibria exist. Lastly, by quantitatively comparing with the standard auctions where no quality reward is used, we show that the use of contracts effectively improves the revenue by incentivizing high investments from the bidders.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Truthful-in-Expectation MMS Allocations for Chores

We study truthful-in-expectation (TIE) mechanisms for allocating indivisible chores alongside ex-post maximin share (MMS) guarantees. For goods, Bu and Tao (FOCS 2025) established a (1/n)-approximation for TIE mechanisms, and this was substantially improved by Babaioff, Feige, and Manaker Morag (FOCS 2026), who established an Ω(1/\log n) approximation, where n is the number of agents. The corresponding problem for chores has received less attention. The best-known result is due to Aziz, Li, and Wu (MAPR 2024), who gave a TIE mechanism with an O(\sqrt{\log n}) MMS approximation guarantee that holds only in expectation. They also established a 6/5 lower bound for TIE mechanisms for two agents. In this paper, we present the first TIE mechanism for chores that achieves a constant ex-post MMS approximation guarantee. Specifically, our mechanism guarantees an ex-post ratio of 1.97 for any number of agents n, which improves to 4/3 for n=2 and 3/2 for n=3. On the hardness side, we tighten the two-agent lower bound to 4/3, showing that our mechanism is optimal for n=2. More generally, we establish a lower bound of 13/12 on the ex-post MMS approximation ratio achievable by TIE mechanisms for every n\ge 3.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Truthful-in-Expectation Mechanism with Constant Maximin-Share Guarantee

We study the truthful and fair allocation of indivisible goods to $n$ strategic agents with additive valuations. Babaioff, Feige, and Manaker Morag [FOCS 2026] gave a randomized mechanism that uses only the agents' rankings of the goods, is truthful in expectation (TIE), and guarantees every agent $1/(H_{n-1}+2)=Θ(1/\log n)$ of her maximin share (MMS) in every realized allocation, where $H_{n-1}$ is the $(n-1)$th harmonic number; this is nearly the best possible with rankings alone. They conjectured that cardinal information allows TIE mechanisms to achieve a constant ex-post MMS guarantee. We confirm this conjecture: our TIE mechanism guarantees every agent at least $1/7$ of her MMS in every realized allocation; moreover, the mechanism is ex-ante envy-free and can be implemented in polynomial time. Our mechanism has two key technical ingredients, both of which may be of independent interest. The first is a truthful fractional allocation rule specifying each agent's probability of receiving each good: it favors each agent on her top $n-1$ goods and reduces her probability of receiving a good for each other agent who also ranks it among her top $n-1$ goods. The second is the balanced edge coloring: we decompose these probabilities into equally likely matchings from agents to high-value goods, those that alone meet an agent's guarantee, and balance these matchings in a fine-grained way without changing any marginal probability, so that every agent who receives no high-value good can obtain sufficient value from the remaining goods without over-allocating any good.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Multi-Winner Elections: Justified Representation, Strategyproofness, and Risk-Avoiding Truthfulness

We study approval-based multi-winner elections with Justified Representation (JR) when voters strategically report their ballots. We prove that there does not exist a strategy-proof mechanism that outputs JR committees, even when the mechanism can be randomized and only Ex-Ante strategyproofness is required. The impossibility already holds with three voters, four candidates, and target committee size three, even when the mechanism may select fewer than three candidates. It applies to every common strictly increasing cardinality-based utility function and scales to every target size $k\geq3$, every number of voters divisible by $k$, and every candidate-set size at least $k+1$. Motivated by our negative results, we then ask for weaker strategy-proof guarantees under voters' partial information. We use the notion of Risk-Avoiding Truthfulness and its RAT-Degree proposed by Hartman, Segal-Halevi, and Tao (EC'25), the number of other voters whose information a manipulator must know before a safe and profitable deviation is possible. Standard proportional rules, such as Greedy Approval Voting, Proportional Approval Voting, and the Method of Equal Shares, have poor performances under the RAT-Degree metric (with low RAT-Degrees). Finally, for $n$ voters, we construct a JR mechanism with RAT-Degree at least $n-5$, without a polynomial-time bound. We then use the same idea together with algebraic ballot encodings to obtain a polynomial-time JR mechanism with RAT-Degree at least $n-7$. When voters also have immutable private identifiers and both the identifiers and ballots of unknown voters are unobserved, we obtain a polynomial-time JR mechanism with RAT-Degree at least $n-1$ for $2\le k<m$. This degree is exactly $n-1$ when $k\ge3$ and $k$ divides $n$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Fair and Efficient Allocations: Decision Problems in the Gap of Polynomial Hierarchy

We consider the fair division problem with indivisible goods and study the following decision problem: given a fair division instance, does there exist an allocation that is envy-free and efficient? We consider two efficiency criteria: Pareto-optimality and social welfare optimality. We provide a complete landscape on the computational complexity of this decision problem, with the number of agents ranging from $2$ to $\infty$, both additive valuations and general valuations, and the more restricted class of $k$-ary valuation functions (where an item's marginal value is restricted to $\{0,1,\ldots,k-1\}$ for some constant $k\geq2$). One interesting observation is that many versions of the above-mentioned decision problems fall into the ``gap'' between the first and the second levels of the polynomial hierarchy. Specifically, assuming the polynomial hierarchy does not collapse to the first level (i.e., assuming $\text{NP}\neq\text{coNP}$), these problems are in $(Σ_2^{\text{p}}\capΠ_2^{\text{p}})\setminus(\text{NP}\cup\text{coNP})$. In particular, we provide a fine-grained complexity analysis across different parameter regimes, including the number of agents and the choice of valuation models. Depending on different parameters, many problems admit different complexity classifications, ranging from the intermediate classes $Θ_2^{\text{p}}$ and $Δ_2^{\text{p}}$ between the two levels to $Σ_2^{\text{p}}$-completeness. Finally, De Keijzer et al. show the $Σ_2^{\text{p}}$-completeness of the decision problem when considering Pareto-optimality as the efficiency criterion with additive valuations. Our main results extend this result to more restricted settings, such as instances with a constant number of agents or $3$-ary valuation functions, which resolves the open problem given by Bouveret and Lang.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Non-Existence of PMMS Allocations and a $4/3$-PMMS Guarantee for Additive Chores

We study pairwise maximin share (PMMS) fairness for indivisible items with additive preferences. We give a polynomial-time reduction from chores to goods that preserves the existence of a PMMS allocation. Together with known nonexistence results for chores, this yields nonexistence for additive goods. In addition, we show that deciding if a given instance admits a PMMS allocation is NP-hard. We also give explicit instances whose PMMS factors are $226/227$ for goods and $1.102065$ for chores, certified by exact enumeration. Complementing these impossibility results, we prove that every additive-chore instance admits a $4/3$-PMMS allocation.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Comparison-Based Fair Division of Indivisible Chores

We investigate the query complexity of fairly allocating $m$ indivisible chores among $n$ agents with additive cost functions. We depart from the standard cardinal model and assume only comparison access: an algorithm may ask an agent which of two bundles is less costly, but never observes numerical costs. Our first results concern proportionality up to one item (PROP1). We design comparison-based algorithms that compute PROP1 allocations using $O(n^3\log m)$ comparison queries. When the chores are arranged in a fixed order and allocations are required to be contiguous, we compute a contiguous PROP1 allocation using $O(n^3 \log^2 m)$ comparison queries. Our main result concerns the maximin share (MMS) guarantee. We show that for any fixed number of agents $n$ and constant $\varepsilon>0$, a $\left(13/11 +\varepsilon\right)$-MMS allocation can be computed with a comparison complexity logarithmic in $m$. Remarkably, comparison access suffices to match the state-of-the-art $13/11$ cardinal-access guarantee of Huang and Segal-Halevi up to an arbitrarily small loss. Furthermore, our result implies that the MMS distortion of comparison access (i.e., the worst-case multiplicative loss in MMS fairness incurred by observing only comparisons rather than numerical costs) is at most $13/11$. Finally, we show that, for three agents, an allocation satisfying envy-freeness up to one item (EF1) can be computed using $O(\log m)$ comparison queries.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Almost Envy-Freeness for Additive Mixed Manna with Entitlements: Deterministic and Randomized Guarantees

We investigate the fair allocation of indivisible items among agents with asymmetric entitlements in mixed manna settings, where the items consist of both goods and chores. For additive valuations, we establish that weighted envy-free up to one item (WEF1) allocations always exist and can be computed in polynomial time. We also study fair and efficient allocation and show that weighted envy-freeness up to one transfer (WEF1T) is compatible with fractional Pareto optimality (fPO) for every mixed-manna instance. This relaxation from WEF1 to WEF1T is tight, as demonstrated by our impossibility result. We further show a best-of-both-worlds result via a finite lottery that guarantees weighted envy-freeness (WEF) in expectation, with every realized allocation satisfying WEF1T and achieving the tight characterization complemented by the existing impossibility result.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Non-Existence of EFX Chore Allocations for Monotone Cost Functions with Binary Marginals

We study the existence of envy-free up to any item (EFX) allocations of indivisible chores when agents have monotone cost functions with binary marginals. For indivisible goods, the corresponding existence question is known to have an affirmative answer for general monotone functions with binary marginals. For chores, however, the existence of EFX allocation was previously known only for more restricted classes, while the general binary-marginal case remained unresolved. In this paper, we provide two counterexamples based on the same 18-agent, 53-chore word gadget, with one cost profile for binary XOS costs and another for binary supermodular costs. In both cases, a complete EFX allocation need not exist. Finally, we formalize and verify our main results in Lean 4.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Bayesian Fair Division: Truthfulness in Picking Sequence with Correlated Valuations

Sequential allocation mechanisms contain a class of widely studied mechanisms (e.g., round-robin) in the fair division of indivisible goods, where agents take turns picking items in a predefined picking order. It is known that the sequential allocation mechanisms are not truthful: when an agent's most preferred item is not valued by others, the agent may manipulate the mechanism by choosing to defer picking that item and instead competing for another slightly less preferred item that is valued by others. Two underlying reasons are that each agent has perfect knowledge of the others' valuations, and each item's value to each agent can differ significantly. Will the mechanism be more truthful when each agent only has partial information about the others' valuations, which are known to be roughly consistent? This naturally motivates the study of the Bayesian fair division model. In this paper, we answer this question affirmatively for two agents. Under the Bayesian model, we precisely characterize the extent of this ``rough consistency'' that incentivizes agents' truth-telling. In particular, we show that for the case of two agents, when the valuations are positively correlated, truth-telling forms a Bayesian Nash equilibrium under the sequential allocation mechanisms. However, we show that truthfulness fails to extend to the setting with more than two agents. For more than two agents, we reveal a new type of manipulation that is different from the above-mentioned manipulation that defers a highly valued but less competitive item. Our result reveals a fundamental limitation on the truthfulness of sequential mechanisms.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Limitations of Best-of-Both-Worlds Solutions in Approval-Based Multiwinner Elections

We study the best-of-both-worlds fairness in approval-based multi-winner elections, asking whether ex-ante guarantees for a fractional outcome can be implemented while every realized committee satisfies an ex-post representation axiom. Recent work has shown that several ex-ante proportionality guarantees can be achieved together with strong ex-post representation axioms. We first prove that ex-ante weak Pareto optimality (weak PO), which requires that no other fractional outcome makes every voter strictly better off, is incompatible with ex-post justified representation (JR). Since fractional core stability implies weak PO, this also rules out the possibility of combining ex-ante fractional core, a central fairness notion for fractional committees, with ex-post JR. We further show that ex-ante AJR is incompatible with ex-post JR, even though AJR is a much stronger average-representation analogue of JR. On the positive side, we show that the fractional ex-ante side itself remains highly compatible: several natural ex-ante representation guarantees can be satisfied simultaneously, including fractional core, group-resource proportionality, AJR (as well as its strict strengthening AJR+), and Pareto-optimality. Hence, highly fair fractional committees may exist even when they cannot be implemented by randomization over JR committees. Our results separate fractional representation from best-of-both-worlds implementability and identify fundamental limitations of fair randomized committee selection.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Best-of-Both-Worlds Fairness for Mixed Goods and Chores

We study the fundamental problem of fairly dividing indivisible items among agents with additive utilities. In our model, an item can be a good yielding non-negative utilities to some agents and simultaneously a chore yielding negative utilities to others. We take the best-of-both-worlds perspective and our goal is to construct a randomized allocation that is exactly fair ex ante while also being supported on ex post approximately fair allocations. The fairness notions examined in this paper are envy-freeness (EF) and its well-known relaxation envy-freeness up to one item (EF1). Our main result is that ex-ante EF and ex-post EF1 can be achieved simultaneously. To achieve this, we introduce a novel probabilistic Hall-type matrix decomposition that intricately correlates the fractional assignments of goods and chores. We resolve this decomposition problem by combining continuous minimax duality -- via Sion's minimax theorem -- with carefully designed biased flow networks.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

EFX for Additive Chores: Nonexistence, Pareto Incompatibility, and Bi-Valued Existence

We consider the fair division problem of indivisible chores and resolve the long-standing open problem for the existence of EFX (envy-free up to any item) allocations with additive cost functions. We show that, even for tri-valued additive cost functions, for every $n\geq 4$, there exists an instance with $n$ agents where no EFX allocation exists. Our counterexample only uses three types of chores and two types of agents. The numbers of types for chores and agents are both tight: an EFX allocation is known to exist for one type of agents (i.e., with identical cost functions) or two types of chores. We then consider bi-valued instances. We show that, for every $n\geq 4$, there exists an instance with $n$ agents where every EFX allocation is not Pareto-optimal. This is also the first example showing the incompatibility of EFX and Pareto-optimality when the costs of items are positive: existing examples showing the incompatibility of EFX and Pareto-optimal exploit items with $0$ costs. Our result shows such an example exists even for bi-valued instances. The number of agents $n$ is also tight: for $n\leq 3$, it is known that EFX is compatible with Pareto-optimality. Finally, we also show that an EFX allocation is guaranteed to exist for $n=4$.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Algorithms and Complexity of Influence Maximization on Directed Acyclic Graphs

This paper investigates the influence maximization problem under the Independent Cascade(IC) and Linear Threshold (LT) models. While this problem is known to be APX-hard on general graphs, we explore its computational limits by focusing on Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) and more restricted tree structures. Our primary result demonstrates that influence maximization remains APX-hard on DAGs under the LT model, suggesting that the absence of cycles is insufficient to achieve a polynomial-time approximation scheme (PTAS). In contrast, we show that the problem becomes tractable when the topology is further restricted to out-arborescences and in-arborescences. Specifically, for out-arborescences, we show that the IC model and the LT model are equivalent, and we develop exact polynomial-time algorithms based on dynamic programming that leverage the unique path properties of these structures. For in-arborescences, it is known that the problem is polynomial-time solvable under the LT model, and it is NP-hard under the IC model. We complement these results by presenting a fully polynomial-time approximation scheme (FPTAS) for the IC model.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

It's Not All Black and White: Degree of Truthfulness for Risk-Avoiding Agents

The classic notion of \emph{truthfulness} requires that no agent has a profitable manipulation -- an untruthful report that, for \emph{some} combination of reports of the other agents, increases her utility. This strong notion implicitly assumes that the manipulating agent either knows what all other agents are going to report, or is willing to take the risk and act as-if she knows their reports. Without knowledge of the others' reports, most manipulations are \emph{risky} -- they might decrease the manipulator's utility for some other combinations of reports by the other agents. Accordingly, a recent paper (Bu, Song and Tao, ``On the existence of truthful fair cake cutting mechanisms'', Artificial Intelligence 319 (2023), 103904) suggests a relaxed notion, which we refer to as \emph{risk-avoiding truthfulness (RAT)}, which requires only that no agent can gain from a \emph{safe} manipulation -- one that is sometimes beneficial and never harmful. Truthfulness and RAT are two extremes: the former considers manipulators with complete knowledge of others, whereas the latter considers manipulators with no knowledge at all. In reality, agents often know about some -- but not all -- of the other agents. This paper introduces the \emph{RAT-degree} of a mechanism, defined as the smallest number of agents whose reports, if known, may allow another agent to safely manipulate, or $n$ if there is no such number. This notion interpolates between classic truthfulness (degree $n$) and RAT (degree at least $1$): a mechanism with a higher RAT-degree is harder to manipulate safely. To illustrate the generality and applicability of this concept, we analyze the RAT-degree of prominent mechanisms across various social choice settings, including auctions, indivisible goods allocations, cake-cutting, voting, and two-sided matching.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Truthful and Almost Envy-Free Mechanism of Allocating Indivisible Goods: the Power of Randomness

We study the problem of fairly and truthfully allocating $m$ indivisible items to $n$ agents with additive preferences. Specifically, we consider truthful mechanisms outputting allocations that satisfy EF$^{+u}_{-v}$, where, in an EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ allocation, for any pair of agents $i$ and $j$, agent $i$ will not envy agent $j$ if $u$ items were added to $i$'s bundle and $v$ items were removed from $j$'s bundle. Previous work easily indicates that, when restricted to deterministic mechanisms, truthfulness will lead to a poor guarantee of fairness: even with two agents, for any $u$ and $v$, EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ cannot be guaranteed by truthful mechanisms when the number of items is large enough. In this work, we focus on randomized mechanisms, where we consider ex-ante truthfulness and ex-post fairness. For two agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-1}$ (i.e., the well-studied fairness notion EF$1$). For three agents, we present a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+1}_{-1}$. For $n$ agents in general, we show that there exists a truthful mechanism that achieves EF$^{+0}_{-O(\sqrt{n})}$. On the negative side, when considering the stronger notion EF$_{-v}^{+u}$X, we show that it cannot be achieved by any randomized truthful mechanism for any $u, v$, and any fixed number of agents. We further consider fair and truthful mechanisms that also satisfy the standard efficiency guarantee: Pareto-optimality. We provide a mechanism that simultaneously achieves truthfulness, EF$1$, and Pareto-optimality for bi-valued utilities (where agents' valuation on each item is either $p$ or $q$ for some $p>q\geq0$). For tri-valued utilities (where agents' valuations on each item belong to $\{p,q,r\}$ for some $p>q>r\geq0$) and any $u,v$, we show that truthfulness is incompatible with EF$^{+u}_{-v}$ and Pareto-optimality even for two agents.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2025

Likelihood of the Existence of Average Justified Representation

We study the approval-based multi-winner election problem where $n$ voters jointly decide a committee of $k$ winners from $m$ candidates. We focus on the axiom \emph{average justified representation} (AJR) proposed by Fernandez, Elkind, Lackner, Garcia, Arias-Fisteus, Basanta-Val, and Skowron (2017). AJR postulates that every group of voters with a common preference should be sufficiently represented in that their average satisfaction should be no less than their Hare quota. Formally, for every group of $\lceil\ell\cdot\frac{n}{k}\rceil$ voters with $\ell$ common approved candidates, the average number of approved winners for this group should be at least $\ell$. It is well-known that a winning committee satisfying AJR is not guaranteed to exist for all multi-winner election instances. In this paper, we study the likelihood of the existence of AJR under the Erdős--Rényi model. We consider the Erdős--Rényi model parameterized by $p\in[0,1]$ that samples multi-winner election instances from the distribution where each voter approves each candidate with probability $p$ (and the events that voters approve candidates are independent), and we provide a clean and complete characterization of the existence of AJR committees in the case where $m$ is a constant and $n$ tends to infinity. We show that there are two phase transition points $p_1$ and $p_2$ (with $p_1\leq p_2$) for the parameter $p$ such that: 1) when $p p_2$, an AJR committee exists with probability $1-o(1)$, 2) when $p_1<p<p_2$, an AJR committee exists with probability $o(1)$, and 3) when $p=p_1$ or $p=p_2$, the probability that an AJR committee exists is bounded away from both $0$ and $1$.

cs.GT↗