We consider a facility location game in which $n$ agents reside at known locations on a path, and $k$ heterogeneous facilities are to be constructed on the path. Each agent is adversely affected by some subset of the facilities, and is unaffected by the others. We design two classes of mechanisms for choosing the facility locations given the reported agent preferences: utilitarian mechanisms that strive to maximize social welfare (i.e., to be efficient), and egalitarian mechanisms that strive to maximize the minimum welfare. For the utilitarian objective, we present a weakly group-strategyproof efficient mechanism for up to three facilities, we give a strongly group-strategyproof mechanism that guarantees at least half of the optimal social welfare for arbitrary $k$, and we prove that no strongly group-strategyproof mechanism achieves an approximation ratio of $5/4$ for one facility. For the egalitarian objective, we present a strategyproof egalitarian mechanism for arbitrary $k$, and we prove that no weakly group-strategyproof mechanism achieves a $o(\sqrt{n})$ approximation ratio for two facilities. We extend our egalitarian results to the case where the agents are located on a cycle, and we extend our first egalitarian result to the case where the agents are located in the unit square.
翻译:我们考虑的是设施地点游戏,在这种游戏中,一美元代理商居住在已知的道路上,一美元混合设施将建造在道路上。每个代理商都受到部分设施的不利影响,不受其他代理商的影响。我们设计了两类机制,根据所报告的代理商的偏好,选择设施地点:实用机制,力求尽量扩大社会福利(即效率高),平等机制,力求尽量扩大最低福利。关于功利主义目标,我们为最多三个设施提出了一个薄弱的集团防战略高效机制,我们提供了强有力的集团防战略机制,保证了至少一半的任意社会福利。我们证明,没有一个强有力的集团防战略机制能够使一个设施达到5/4美元的近似比率。为了平等目标,我们为任意的美元提供一个战略防偏差的平等机制,我们证明,对于三个设施来说,我们没有薄弱的集团防战略高效机制,我们提供了一种最差的美元(sqrt{n})近似比率,我们提供了一种强有力的集体战略机制,可以保证至少一半的最佳社会福利为任意的美元,而且不受其他设施不受影响。我们证明,任何强烈的集团防制衡机制都无法达到5/4美元的近似比率。为了一个设施,我们将一个稳定的代理商进入一个正常的平方,我们将处于一个周期。