https://arxiv.org/api/TclPGKM6ebee22OD+4Jp+MGTcDs 2026-03-22T12:02:42Z 3810 90 15 http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.02961v1 2026-03-03T13:14:23Z

As AI systems enter institutional workflows, workers must decide whether to delegate task execution to AI and how much effort to invest in verifying AI outputs, while institutions evaluate workers using outcome-based standards that may misalign with workers' private costs. We model delegation and verification as the solution to a rational worker's optimization problem, and define worker quality by evaluating an institution-centered utility (distinct from the worker's objective) at the resulting optimal action. We formally characterize optimal worker workflows and show that AI induces *phase transitions*, where arbitrarily small differences in verification ability lead to sharply different behaviors. As a result, AI can amplify workers with strong verification reliability while degrading institutional worker quality for others who rationally over-delegate and reduce oversight, even when baseline task success improves and no behavioral biases are present. These results identify a structural mechanism by which AI reshapes institutional worker quality and amplifies quality disparities between workers with different verification reliability.

2026-03-03T13:14:23Z Lingxiao Huang Wenyang Xiao Nisheeth K. Vishnoi http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.15472v3 2026-03-03T03:35:53Z

Allocating indivisible goods is a ubiquitous task in fair division. We study additive welfarist rules, an important class of rules which choose an allocation that maximizes the sum of some function of the agents' utilities. Prior work has shown that the maximum Nash welfare (MNW) rule is the unique additive welfarist rule that guarantees envy-freeness up to one good (EF1). We strengthen this result by showing that MNW remains the only additive welfarist rule that ensures EF1 for identical-good instances, two-value instances, as well as normalized instances with three or more agents. On the other hand, if the agents' utilities are integers, we demonstrate that several other rules offer the EF1 guarantee, and provide characterizations of these rules for various classes of instances.

2024-12-20T01:01:09Z Appears in the 24th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), 2025 Karen Frilya Celine Warut Suksompong Sheung Man Yuen 10.1145/3793253 http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.02599v2 2026-03-02T19:00:26Z

In an auction each party bids a certain amount and the one which bids the highest is the winner. Interestingly, auctions can also be used as models for other real-world systems. In an all pay auction all parties must pay a forfeit for bidding. In the most commonly studied all pay auction, parties forfeit their entire bid, and this has been considered as a model for expenditure on political campaigns. Here we consider a number of alternative forfeits which might be used as models for different real-world competitions, such as preparing bids for defense or infrastructure contracts.

2020-02-07T03:07:47Z 14 pages, matches version published in Games Benjamin Kang James Unwin 10.3390/g17010002 http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.02113v1 2026-03-02T17:37:31Z

In this paper, we study which data can be induced by a correlated equilibrium given a known finite simultaneous move game. We assume that an analyst has access to the frequency of each agent's actions but does not have access to the distribution over joint action profiles. We characterize which sets of marginal distributions over actions arise from some correlated equilibria via a type of no arbitrage condition. An outside observer is unable to make a profit in expectation by independently contracting with each agent and collecting a portion of the total utility gained via unilateral deviation. This characterization naturally extends to Nash equilibria.

2026-03-02T17:37:31Z Christopher P. Chambers Maxime Cugnon de Sévricourt Christopher Turansick http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.05338v4 2026-03-02T15:01:54Z

We study repeated task assignment as an instrument for providing effort incentives. Unlike traditional incentive instruments, assignment of a task both determines who produces and provides incentives, and incentives for one worker spill over to others because assignment is exclusive. We show that optimal incentives require a strict and evolving priority ranking through which workers are assigned the task. This ranking implies that workers' average workloads differ even when they are symmetric in all payoff-relevant respects. We characterize how workforce size, monitoring, and working conditions shape the scope of optimal incentive provision and the resulting inequality among workers.

2025-11-07T15:33:50Z Yonghang Ji Allen Vong http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.21812v3 2026-03-02T14:38:52Z

We investigate Ekici (2024b)'s multi-center allocation problems, focusing on fairness in this context. We introduce three fairness notions that respect centers' priorities: internal fairness, external fairness, and procedural fairness. The first notion eliminates envy among agents within the same center, the second prohibits envy across different centers, and the third rules out envy from an ex-ante perspective through agents' trading opportunities. We provide two characterizations of a natural extension of the top-trading-cycles mechanism (TTC) through our fairness notions. Precisely, we show that in the presence of strategy-proofness and pair efficiency, internal fairness and external fairness together characterize TTC (Theorem 1). Also, strategy-proofness combined solely with procedural fairness also characterizes TTC (Theorem 2). Furthermore, by adding internal fairness, we establish our third TTC characterization, by relaxing Ekici's queuewise rationality to another voluntary participation condition, the center lower bound (Theorem 3). Finally, we define a core solution within this model and characterize it through TTC (Theorem 4). Our findings offer practical insights for market designers, particularly in contexts such as international cooperation in medical programs and worker exchange programs.

2025-09-26T03:16:16Z Yao Cheng Di Feng http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.19585v2 2026-03-02T08:15:51Z

Decision makers sometimes cannot observe the consequences of their actions ex-post. This paper axiomatically characterizes a decision model in which the decision maker cares about verifying that a good consequence has been achieved. Preferences over acts identify a set of events the decision maker expects to verify. Decision makers choose acts maximizing, in expectation over verifiable events, the worst-case utility consistent with each event. A dual model captures decision makers who instead seek to obscure poor outcomes from verification. As an application, firms choosing carbon-reduction technologies may prefer less efficient but more verifiable technologies to prove emission reductions to stakeholders.

2025-08-27T05:42:03Z Hendrik Rommeswinkel http://arxiv.org/abs/2011.04306v6 2026-03-01T11:33:32Z

This paper studies the allocation problem in environments where, in addition to having ordinal preferences, agents also have *ordinal intensities*: they can say "I prefer a to b more than I prefer c to d" without necessarily being able to claim *how much* more. A rank-based criterion for interpersonal comparisons of ordinal intensities is introduced for this analytical environment. Building on it, the concepts of *intensity-dominated*, *intensity-efficient* and *intensity-positional* allocations are defined.Two allocations are related by intensity dominance if they assign the same two items to the same two agents but in a "flipped" way, and one allocation assigns the commonly preferred item in any such pair to the agent who prefers it more. An allocation is "intensity-efficient" if it is Pareto-efficient and not intensity-dominated. Distinctly, an allocation is "intensity-positional" if it maximizes the agents' total "intensity-rank scores". The latter extend standard Borda scores to environments where consecutively-ranked items do not necessarily feature identical intensity differences. The paper analyses intensity-efficient and intensity-positional allocations, and clarifies how they differ from those based on the utilitarian or Borda rules.

2020-11-09T10:23:22Z Georgios Gerasimou http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.01387v2 2026-03-01T04:55:22Z

In a multi-follower Bayesian Stackelberg game, a leader plays a mixed strategy over $L$ actions to which $n\ge 1$ followers, each having one of $K$ possible private types, best respond. The leader's optimal strategy depends on the distribution of the followers' private types. We study an online learning version of this problem: a leader interacts for $T$ rounds with $n$ followers with types sampled from an unknown distribution every round. The leader's goal is to minimize regret, defined as the difference between the cumulative utility of the optimal strategy and that of the actually chosen strategies. We design learning algorithms for the leader under different feedback settings. Under type feedback, where the leader observes the followers' types after each round, we design algorithms that achieve $O\big(\sqrt{\min(L\log(nKA T), nK ) \cdot T} \big)$ regret for independent type distributions and $O\big(\sqrt{\min(L\log(nKA T), K^n ) \cdot T} \big)$ regret for general type distributions. Interestingly, those bounds do not grow with $n$ at a polynomial rate. Under action feedback, where the leader only observes the followers' actions, we design algorithms with $O( \min(\sqrt{ n^L K^L A^{2L} L T \log T}, K^n\sqrt{ T } \log T ) )$ regret. We also provide a lower bound of $Ω(\sqrt{\min(L, nK)T})$, almost matching the type-feedback upper bounds.

2025-10-01T19:20:35Z Accepted by ICLR 2026 Gerson Personnat Tao Lin Safwan Hossain David C. Parkes http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.00858v1 2026-03-01T01:24:49Z

With recent development of artificial intelligence, it is more common to adopt AI agents in economic activities. This paper explores the economic actions of agents, including human agents and AI agents, in an economic game of trading products/services, and the equilibria in this economy involving multiple agents. We derive a range of equilibrium results and their corresponding conditions using a Markov chain stationary distribution based model. One distinct feature of our model is that we consider the long-term utility generated by economic activities instead of their short-term benefits. For the model consisting of two agents, we fully characterize all the possible economic equilibria and conditions. Interestingly, we show that unless each agent can at least double (not merely increase) its marginal utility by purchasing the other agent's products/services, purchasing the other agent's products/services will not happen in any economic equilibrium. We further extend our results to three and more agents, where we characterize more economic equilibria. We find that in some equilibria, the ``more powerful'' AI agents contribute zero utility to ``less capable'' agents.

2026-03-01T01:24:49Z 20 pages Huan Cai Ziqing Lu Catherine Xu Weiyu Xu Jie Zheng http://arxiv.org/abs/2202.00729v2 2026-02-28T22:38:27Z

We study a social bandit problem featuring production and diffusion of knowledge. While higher connectivity enhances knowledge diffusion, it may reduce knowledge production as agents shy away from experimentation with new ideas and free ride on the observation of other agents. As a result, under some conditions, greater connectivity can lead to homogeneity and lower social welfare.

2022-02-01T19:57:01Z Gustavo Manso Farzad Pourbabaee http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.04122v5 2026-02-28T08:53:50Z

Can a welfare-maximising risk-sharing rule be implemented in a large, decentralised community? We revisit the price-and-choose (P&C) mechanism of Echenique and Núñez (2025), in which players post price schedules sequentially and the last mover selects an allocation. P&C implements every Pareto-optimal allocation when the choice set is finite, but realistic risk-sharing problems involve an infinite continuum of feasible allocations. We extend P&C to infinite menus by modelling each allocation as a bounded random vector that redistributes an aggregate loss $X=\sum_i X_i$. We prove that the extended mechanism still implements the allocation that maximises aggregate (monetary) utility, even when players entertain heterogeneous credal sets of finitely additive probabilities (charges) dominated by a reference probability $\mathbb{P}$. Our credal sets are weak$^{\ast}$-compact and are restricted so that utility functionals are uniformly Lipschitz on the feasible set. Finally, we pair P&C with the first-mover auction of Echenique and Núñez (2025), adapted to our infinite-menu, multiple-prior environment. Under complete information about players' credal sets, the auction equalises the surplus among participants. The result is a decentralised, enforcement-free procedure that achieves both optimal and fair risk sharing under heterogeneous priors.

2025-05-07T04:35:08Z 24 pages, 1 figure Michiko Ogaku http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.09168v3 2026-02-28T01:48:24Z

We study allocation mechanisms that utilize costly signaling as a screening tool. A social planner aims to maximize social welfare, defined as the weighted sum of agents' utilities, while implementing a specific allocation rule. Within a broad class of agent preferences, we show that coordination mechanisms (where recommended signals depend on joint reports) can be outperformed by non-coordination mechanisms (where signals depend solely on individual reports). We formalize the conditions under which the optimal mechanism features no coordination and demonstrate that such mechanisms are implementable through coarse-ranking contests.

2023-02-17T22:46:30Z Yingkai Li Xiaoyun Qiu http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.13137v11 2026-02-27T20:48:53Z

This paper studies a durable goods monopoly with multiple provision levels, free disposability, and zero marginal cost. We establish a Folk-Theorem-type result: as parties become sufficiently patient, equilibrium seller payoffs contains an interval bounded below by the lowest-type buyer's efficient surplus and above by the maximal static payoff under incentive-compatible mechanisms guaranteeing that type efficient provision. This multiplicity arises because free disposability and zero marginal cost render the efficient provision level non-unique. Our analysis demonstrates how structural features common in information goods can undermine the Coase conjecture.

2025-07-17T13:59:01Z Zihao Li http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.24194v1 2026-02-27T17:17:52Z

This paper examines the impact of introducing a Rank-Dependent Utility (RDU) agent into a von Neumann-Morgenstern (vNM) pure-exchange economy with no aggregate uncertainty. In the absence of the RDU agent, the classical theory predicts that Pareto-optimal allocations are full-insurance, or no-betting, allocations. We show how the probability weighting function of the RDU agent, seen as a proxy for probabilistic risk aversion that is not captured by marginal utility of wealth, can lead to Pareto optima characterized by endogenous betting, despite common baseline beliefs. Such endogenous betting at an optimum leads to uncertainty-generating trade arising purely from heterogeneity in the perception of risk, rather than in beliefs. Our results formalize the intuitive understanding that probability weighting can act as an endogenous source of belief heterogeneity, and provide a new behavioral foundation for the coexistence of common beliefs and speculative behavior, in an environment with no initial aggregate uncertainty. Interpreting the RDU agent's nonlinear weighting function as an ``internality'' prompts the question of whether a social planner should intervene. We show how a benevolent social planner can nudge the RDU agent to behave closer to a vNM agent, through costly statistical or financial education, thereby (partially) restoring the optimality of full-insurance allocations.

2026-02-27T17:17:52Z Patrick Beissner Tim Boonen Mario Ghossoub