On approximately fair allocations of indivisible goods

Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce

Volumn 5, Issue , 2004, Pages 125-131

  Lipton, Richard ^a   Markakis, Evangelos ^a   Mossel, Elchanan ^b   Saberi, Amin ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Approximation Algorithm; Envy; Fairness; Truthfulness

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; APPROXIMATION THEORY; COMBINATORIAL MATHEMATICS; COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; OPTIMIZATION; SCHEDULING; THEOREM PROVING;

APPROXIMATION ALGORITHM; COMBINATORIAL ALGORITHMS; ENVY; FAIRNESS; TRUTHFULNESS;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 3242759847     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/988772.988792     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. A. Alkan, G. Demange, and D. Gale. Fair allocation of indivisible goods and criteria of justice. Econometrica, 59:1023-1039, 1991.
2. N. Alon, Y. Azar, G. Woeginger, and T. Yadid. Approximation schemes for scheduling on parallel machines. Journal of Scheduling, 98:55-66, 1998.
3. C. Bazgan, M. Santha, and Z. Tuza. Efficient approximation algorithms for the subset-sum problem. In ICALP, pages 387-396, 1998.
4. S. J. Brams and A. D. Taylor. Fair Division: from Cake Cutting to Dispute Resolution. Cambrifge University press, 1996.
5. E. G. Coffman and M. A. Langston. A performance guarantee for the greedy set-partitioning algorithm. Acta Informatica, 21:409-415, 1984.
6. X. Deng, C. H. Papadimitriou, and M. Safra. On the complexity of equilibria. In Annual Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 67-71, 2002.
7. B. L. Deuermeyer, D. K. Friesen, and M. A. Langston. Scheduling to maximize the minimum procesor finish time in a multiprocessor system. SIAM Journal of Algebraic and Discrete Methods, 3:190-196, 1982.
8. M. Dall'Aglio and T. P. Hill. Maximin-share and minimax-envy in fair-division problems. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 2003.
9. D. Foley. Resource allocation and the public sector. Yale Economics Essays, 7:45-98, 1967.
10. R. L. Graham. Bounds on multiprocessing timing anomalies. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics, 17:416-429, 1969.
11. D. S. Hochbaum and D. B. Shmoys. Using dual approximation algorithms for scheduling problems. Journal of the ACM, 34:144-162, 1987.
12. H. W. Lenstra. Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. Math. Oper. Res., 8:538-548, 1983.
13. J. K. Lenstra, D. B. Shmoys, and E. Tardos. Approximation algorithms for scheduling unrelated parallel machines. Mathematical Programming, 46:259-271, 1990.
14. N. Nisan and I. Segal. The Communication requirements of efficient allocations and supporting lindahl prices. In DIMACS Workshop on Computational Issues in Game Theory and Mechanism Design, 2001.
15. S. J. Robertson and A. D. Webb. Cake-Cutting Algorithms: Be fair if you can. AK Peters, 1998.
16. H. Steinhaus. The problem of fair division. Econometrica, 16:101-104, 1948.
17. K. Tadenuma and W. Thomson. The fair allocation of an indivisible good when monetary compensations are possible. Mathematical Social Sciences, 25(2):117-132, 1993.
18. H. Varian. Equity, envy and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory, 9:63-91, 1974.
19. V. V. Vazirani. Approximation Algorithms. Springer-Verlag, 2001.
20. G. Woeginger. A polynomial time approximation scheme for maximizing the minimum machine completion time. Operations Research Letters, 20:149-154, 1997.