On the Power of Randomization for Obviously Strategy-Proof Mechanisms
Shiri Ron, Daniel Schoepflin
Abstract
We investigate the problem of designing randomized obviously strategy-proof (OSP) mechanisms in several canonical auction settings. Obvious strategy-proofness, introduced by Li [Li17], strengthens the well-known concept of dominant-strategy incentive compatibility (DSIC). Loosely speaking, it ensures that even agents who struggle with contingent reasoning can identify that their dominant strategy is optimal. Thus, one would hope to design OSP mechanisms with good approximation guarantees. Unfortunately, deterministic OSP mechanisms fail to achieve an approximation better than minm, n where m is the number of items and n is the number of bidders, even for the simple settings of additive and unit-demand bidders [Ron24]. We circumvent these impossibilities by showing that randomized mechanisms that are obviously strategy-proof in the universal sense obtain a constant factor approximation for these classes. We show that this phenomenon occurs also for the setting of a multi-unit auction with single-minded bidders. Thus, our results provide a more positive outlook on the design of OSP mechanisms and exhibit a stark separation between the power of randomized and deterministic OSP mechanisms. To complement the picture, we provide impossibilities for randomized OSP mechanisms in each setting. While the deterministic VCG mechanism is well known to output an optimal allocation in dominant strategies, we show that even randomized OSP mechanisms cannot obtain more than 87.5% of the optimal welfare. This further demonstrates that OSP mechanisms are significantly weaker than dominant-strategy mechanisms. 1 We also provide a 400 approximation to the optimal welfare for multi-unit auctions with bidders whose valuations satisfy decreasing marginal utilities (Theorem 14). This is the only multi-parameter domain for which the power of deterministic mechanisms is not known. In Subsection 3.2.1, we describe a non-monotonicity effect that illustrates a barrier towards proving impossibilities for this class.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Builds on5
- Improved Truthful Mechanisms for Subadditive Combinatorial Auctions: Breaking the Logarithmic BarrierSepehr Assadi, Thomas Kesselheim, Sahil SinglaSODA 2021 · 22 citations
- Deterministic Budget-Feasible Clock AuctionsEric Balkanski, Pranav Garimidi, Vasilis Gkatzelis, Daniel Schoepflin et al.SODA 2022 · 12 citations
- On the hardness of dominant strategy mechanism designShahar Dobzinski, Shiri Ron, Jan VondrákSTOC 2022 · 5 citations
- Impossibilities for Obviously Strategy-Proof MechanismsShiri RonSODA 2024 · 4 citations
- Settling the Communication Complexity of VCG-Based Mechanisms for All Approximation GuaranteesFrederick V. Qiu, S. Matthew WeinbergSTOC 2024 · 1 citation
Related papers
- Breaking Barriers, Finding Boundaries: Not Obviously Manipulable Budget-Feasible Mechanism DesignBart de Keijzer, Guido Schäfer, Artem Tsikiridis, Carmine VentreAAAI 2026
- Strategy-Proof and Non-Wasteful Multi-Unit Auction via Social NetworkTakehiro Kawasaki, Nathanaël Barrot, Seiji Takanashi, Taiki Todo et al.AAAI 2020 · 42 citations
- Bilateral Trade with Correlated ValuesShahar Dobzinski, Ariel ShaulkerSTOC 2024 · 2 citations
- Fair and Efficient Allocations Without Obvious ManipulationsAlexandros Psomas, Paritosh VermaNeurIPS 2022 · 37 citations
- Automated Deterministic Auction Design with Objective DecompositionZhijian Duan, Haoran Sun, Yichong Xia, Siqiang Wang et al.WWW 2026 · 1 citation
