Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Simina Brânzei

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

11 papers
2 author rows

Possible papers

11

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Dueling over Dessert, Mastering the Art of Repeated Cake Cutting

  • Simina Brânzei
  • MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi
  • Reed Phillips
  • Suho Shin
  • Kun Wang

We consider the setting of repeated fair division between two players, denoted Alice and Bob, with private valuations over a cake. In each round, a new cake arrives, which is identical to the ones in previous rounds. Alice cuts the cake at a point of her choice, while Bob chooses the left piece or the right piece, leaving the remainder for Alice. We consider two versions: sequential, where Bob observes Alice's cut point before choosing left/right, and simultaneous, where he only observes her cut point after making his choice. The simultaneous version was first considered by Aumann and Maschler. We observe that if Bob is almost myopic and chooses his favorite piece too often, then he can be systematically exploited by Alice through a strategy akin to a binary search. This strategy allows Alice to approximate Bob's preferences with increasing precision, thereby securing a disproportionate share of the resource over time. We analyze the limits of how much a player can exploit the other one and show that fair utility profiles are in fact achievable. Specifically, the players can enforce the equitable utility profile of $(1/2, 1/2)$ in the limit on every trajectory of play, by keeping the other player's utility to approximately $1/2$ on average while guaranteeing they themselves get at least approximately $1/2$ on average. We show this theorem using a connection with Blackwell approachability. Finally, we analyze a natural dynamic known as fictitious play, where players best respond to the empirical distribution of the other player. We show thatfictitious play converges to the equitable utility profile of $(1/2, 1/2)$ at a rate of $O(1/\sqrt{T})$.

AIJ Journal 2023 Journal Article

Walrasian pricing in multi-unit auctions

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Aris Filos-Ratsikas
  • Peter Bro Miltersen
  • Yulong Zeng

Multi-unit auctions are a paradigmatic model of resource allocation, where a seller brings multiple units of a good to a set of buyers equipped with monetary budgets. It is well known that Walrasian equilibria do not always exist in this model, however compelling relaxations such as Walrasian envy-free pricing do. We design a best possible envy-free and prior-free mechanism for multi-unit auctions with budgets. When the market is even mildly competitive, the approximation ratios of this mechanism are small constants for both the revenue and welfare objectives, and in fact for welfare the approximation converges to 1 as the market becomes fully competitive. We also give an impossibility theorem, showing that truthfulness requires discarding resources and is thus incompatible with (Pareto) efficiency.

AAAI Conference 2019 Conference Paper

Walrasian Dynamics in Multi-Unit Markets

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Aris Filos-Ratsikas

In a multi-unit market, a seller brings multiple units of a good and tries to sell them to a set of buyers that have monetary endowments. While a Walrasian equilibrium does not always exist in this model, natural relaxations of the concept that retain its desirable fairness properties do exist. We study the dynamics of (Walrasian) envy-free pricing mechanisms in this environment, showing that for any such pricing mechanism, the best response dynamic starting from truth-telling converges to a pure Nash equilibrium with small loss in revenue and welfare. Moreover, we generalize these bounds to capture all the (reasonable) Nash equilibria for a large class of (monotone) pricing mechanisms. We also identify a natural mechanism, which selects the minimum Walrasian envy-free price, in which for n=2 buyers the best response dynamic converges from any starting profile. We conjecture convergence of the mechanism for any number of buyers and provide simulation results to support our conjecture.

MFCS Conference 2017 Conference Paper

Walrasian Pricing in Multi-Unit Auctions

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Aris Filos-Ratsikas
  • Peter Bro Miltersen
  • Yulong Zeng

Multi-unit auctions are a paradigmatic model, where a seller brings multiple units of a good, while several buyers bring monetary endowments. It is well known that Walrasian equilibria do not always exist in this model, however compelling relaxations such as Walrasian envy-free pricing do. In this paper we design an optimal envy-free mechanism for multi-unit auctions with budgets. When the market is even mildly competitive, the approximation ratios of this mechanism are small constants for both the revenue and welfare objectives, and in fact for welfare the approximation converges to 1 as the market becomes fully competitive. We also give an impossibility theorem, showing that truthfulness requires discarding resources, and in particular, is incompatible with (Pareto) efficiency.

AAAI Conference 2016 Conference Paper

An Algorithmic Framework for Strategic Fair Division

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Ioannis Caragiannis
  • David Kurokawa
  • Ariel Procaccia

We study the paradigmatic fair division problem of fairly allocating a divisible good among agents with heterogeneous preferences, commonly known as cake cutting. Classic cake cutting protocols are susceptible to manipulation. Do their strategic outcomes still guarantee fairness? To address this question we adopt a novel algorithmic approach, proposing a concrete computational model and reasoning about the gametheoretic properties of algorithms that operate in this model. Specifically, we show that each protocol in the class of generalized cut and choose (GCC) protocols — which includes the most important discrete cake cutting protocols — is guaranteed to have approximate subgame perfect Nash equilibria, or even exact equilibria if the protocol’s tie-breaking rule is flexible. We further observe that the (approximate) equilibria of proportional protocols — which guarantee each of the n agents a 1/n-fraction of the cake — must be (approximately) proportional, thereby answering the above question in the positive (at least for one common notion of fairness).

JAAMAS Journal 2016 Journal Article

The authorship dilemma: alphabetical or contribution?

  • Margareta Ackerman
  • Simina Brânzei

Abstract Scientific communities have adopted different conventions for ordering authors on publications. Are these choices inconsequential, or do they have significant influence on individual authors, the quality of the projects completed, and research communities at large? What are the trade-offs of using one convention over another? In order to investigate these questions, we formulate a basic two-player game theoretic model, which already illustrates interesting phenomena that can occur in more realistic settings. We find that contribution-based ordering leads to a denser collaboration network and a greater number of publications, while alphabetical ordering can improve research quality. Contrary to the assumption that free riding is a weakness of the alphabetical ordering scheme, when there are only two authors, this phenomenon can occur under any contribution scheme, and the worst case occurs under contribution-based ordering. Finally, we show how authors working on multiple projects can cooperate to attain optimal research quality and eliminate free riding given either contribution scheme.

AAAI Conference 2014 Conference Paper

Simultaneous Cake Cutting

  • Eric Balkanski
  • Simina Brânzei
  • David Kurokawa
  • Ariel Procaccia

We introduce the simultaneous model for cake cutting (the fair allocation of a divisible good), in which agents simultaneously send messages containing a sketch of their preferences over the cake. We show that this model enables the computation of divisions that satisfy proportionality — a popular fairness notion — using a protocol that circumvents a standard lower bound via parallel information elicitation. Cake divisions satisfying another prominent fairness notion, envy-freeness, are impossible to compute in the simultaneous model, but admit arbitrarily good approximations.

AAAI Conference 2014 Conference Paper

The Fisher Market Game: Equilibrium and Welfare

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Yiling Chen
  • Xiaotie Deng
  • Aris Filos-Ratsikas
  • Søren Frederiksen
  • Jie Zhang

The Fisher market model is one of the most fundamental resource allocation models in economics. In a Fisher market, the prices and allocations of goods are determined according to the preferences and budgets of buyers to clear the market. In a Fisher market game, however, buyers are strategic and report their preferences over goods; the marketclearing prices and allocations are then determined based on their reported preferences rather than their real preferences. We show that the Fisher market game always has a pure Nash equilibrium, for buyers with linear, Leontief, and Cobb-Douglas utility functions, which are three representative classes of utility functions in the important Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) family. Furthermore, to quantify the social efficiency, we prove Price of Anarchy bounds for the game when the utility functions of buyers fall into these three classes respectively.

AAAI Conference 2012 Conference Paper

Weighted Clustering

  • Margareta Ackerman
  • Shai Ben-David
  • Simina Brânzei
  • David Loker

We investigate a natural generalization of the classical clustering problem, considering clustering tasks in which different instances may have different weights. We conduct the first extensive theoretical analysis on the influence of weighted data on standard clustering algorithms in both the partitional and hierarchical settings, characterizing the conditions under which algorithms react to weights. Extending a recent framework for clustering algorithm selection, we propose intuitive properties that would allow users to choose between clustering algorithms in the weighted setting and classify algorithms accordingly.

IJCAI Conference 2009 Conference Paper

  • Simina Brânzei
  • Kate Larson

We present and analyze coalitional affinity games, a family of hedonic games that explicitly model the value that an agent receives from being associated with other agents. We provide a characterization of the social-welfare maximizing coalition structures, and study the stability properties of affinity games, using the core solution concept. Interestingly, we observe that members of the core do not necessarily maximize social welfare. We introduce a new measure, the stability-gap to capture this difference. Using the stability gap, we show that for an interesting class of coalitional affinity games, the difference between the social welfare of a stable coalition structure and a social welfare maximizing coalition structure is bounded by a factor of two, and that this bound is tight.

v2026.09.13