Search Results

A canonical setting for non-monetary online resource allocation is one where agents compete over multiple rounds for a single item per round, with i.i.d. valuations and additive utilities across rounds. With n symmetric agents, a natural benchmark for each agent is the utility realized by her favorite 1/n-fraction of rounds; a line of work has demonstrated one can robustly guarantee each agent a constant fraction of this ideal utility, irrespective of how other agents behave. In particular, several mechanisms have been shown to be 1/2-robust, and recent work established that repeated first-price auctions based on artificial credits have a robustness factor of 0.59, which cannot be improved beyond 0.6 using first-price and simple strategies. In contrast, even without strategic considerations, the best achievable factor is 1-1/e≈ 0.63. In this work, we break the 0.6 first-price barrier to get a new 0.625-robust mechanism, which almost closes the gap to the non-strategic robustness bound. Surprisingly, we do so via a simple auction, where in each round, bidders decide if they ask for the item, and we allocate uniformly at random among those who ask. The main new ingredient is the idea of competitive subsidies, wherein we charge the winning agent an amount in artificial credits that decreases when fewer agents are bidding (specifically, when k agents bid, then the winner pays proportional to k/(k+1), varying the payment by a factor of 2 depending on the competition). Moreover, we show how it can be modified to get an equilibrium strategy with a slightly weaker robust guarantee of 5/(3e) ≈ 0.61 (and the optimal 1-1/e factor at equilibrium). Finally, we show that our mechanism gives the best possible bound under a wide class of auction-based mechanisms.