arXiv subjects

Jonathan Wagner

Publications and source records attributed to Jonathan Wagner.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Truthful Reporting of Competence with Minimal Verification

Suppose you run a home exam, where students should report their own scores but can cheat freely. You can, if needed, call a limited number of students to class and verify their actual performance against their reported score. We consider the class of mechanisms where truthful reporting is a dominant strategy, and truthful agents are never penalized -- even off-equilibrium. How many students do we need to verify, in expectation, if we want to minimize the bias, i.e., the difference between agents' competence and their expected grade? When perfect verification is available, we characterize the best possible tradeoff between these requirements and provide a simple parametrized mechanism that is optimal in the class for any distribution of agents' types. When verification is noisy, the task becomes much more challenging. We show how proper scoring rules can be leveraged in different ways to construct truthful mechanisms with a good (though not necessarily optimal) tradeoff.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2024

Distribution Aggregation via Continuous Thiele's Rules

We introduce the class of \textit{Continuous Thiele's Rules} that generalize the familiar \textbf{Thiele's rules} \cite{janson2018phragmens} of multi-winner voting to distribution aggregation problems. Each rule in that class maximizes $\sum_if(\pi^i)$ where $\pi^i$ is an agent $i$'s satisfaction and $f$ could be any twice differentiable, increasing and concave real function. Based on a single quantity we call the \textit{'Inequality Aversion'} of $f$ (elsewhere known as "Relative Risk Aversion"), we derive bounds on the Egalitarian loss, welfare loss and the approximation of \textit{Average Fair Share}, leading to a quantifiable, continuous presentation of their inevitable trade-offs. In particular, we show that the Nash Product Rule satisfies\textit{ Average Fair Share} in our setting.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2023

Strategy-proof Budgeting via a VCG-like Mechanism

We present a strategy-proof public goods budgeting mechanism where agents determine both the total volume of expanses and the specific allocation. It is constructed as a modification of VCG to a less typical environment, namely where we do not assume quasi-linear utilities nor direct revelation. We further show that under plausible assumptions it satisfies strategy-proofness in strictly dominant strategies, and consequently implements the social optimum as a Coalition Proof Nash Equilibrium. A primary (albeit not an exclusive) motivation of our model is Participatory Budgeting, where members of a community collectively decide the spending policy of public tax dollars. While incentives alignment in our mechanism, as in classic VCG, is achieved via individual payments we charge from agents, in a PB context that seems unreasonable. Our second main result thus provides that, under further specifications relevant in that context, these payments will vanish in large populations. In the last section we expand the mechanism's definition to a class of mechanisms in which the designer can prioritize certain outcomes she sees as desirable. In particular we give the example of favoring equitable (egalitarian) allocations.

cs.GT↗