The Double Clinching Auction for Wagering

Rupert Freeman, David M. Pennock, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan
{"title":"The Double Clinching Auction for Wagering","authors":"Rupert Freeman, David M. Pennock, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan","doi":"10.1145/3033274.3085118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We develop the first incentive compatible and near-Pareto-optimal wagering mechanism. Wagering mechanisms can be used to elicit predictions from agents who reveal their beliefs by placing bets. Lambert et al. [20, 21] introduced weighted score wagering mechanisms, a class of budget-balanced wagering mechanisms under which agents with immutable beliefs truthfully report their predictions. However, we demonstrate that these and other existing incentive compatible wagering mechanisms are not Pareto optimal: agents have significant budget left over even when additional trade would be mutually beneficial. Motivated by this observation, we design a new wagering mechanism, the double clinching auction, a two-sided version of the adaptive clinching auction [9]. We show that no wagering mechanism can simultaneously satisfy weak budget balance, individual rationality, weak incentive compatibility, and Pareto optimality. However, we prove that the double clinching auction attains the first three and show in a series of simulations using real contest data that it comes much closer to Pareto optimality than previously known incentive compatible wagering mechanisms, in some cases almost matching the efficiency of the Pareto optimal (but not incentive compatible) parimutuel consensus mechanism. When the goal of wagering is to crowdsource probabilities, Pareto optimality drives participation and incentive compatibility drives accuracy, making the double clinching auction an attractive and practical choice. Our mechanism may be of independent interest as the first two-sided version of the adaptive clinching auction.","PeriodicalId":287551,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3033274.3085118","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

We develop the first incentive compatible and near-Pareto-optimal wagering mechanism. Wagering mechanisms can be used to elicit predictions from agents who reveal their beliefs by placing bets. Lambert et al. [20, 21] introduced weighted score wagering mechanisms, a class of budget-balanced wagering mechanisms under which agents with immutable beliefs truthfully report their predictions. However, we demonstrate that these and other existing incentive compatible wagering mechanisms are not Pareto optimal: agents have significant budget left over even when additional trade would be mutually beneficial. Motivated by this observation, we design a new wagering mechanism, the double clinching auction, a two-sided version of the adaptive clinching auction [9]. We show that no wagering mechanism can simultaneously satisfy weak budget balance, individual rationality, weak incentive compatibility, and Pareto optimality. However, we prove that the double clinching auction attains the first three and show in a series of simulations using real contest data that it comes much closer to Pareto optimality than previously known incentive compatible wagering mechanisms, in some cases almost matching the efficiency of the Pareto optimal (but not incentive compatible) parimutuel consensus mechanism. When the goal of wagering is to crowdsource probabilities, Pareto optimality drives participation and incentive compatibility drives accuracy, making the double clinching auction an attractive and practical choice. Our mechanism may be of independent interest as the first two-sided version of the adaptive clinching auction.
双拍投注
我们开发了第一个激励相容的近似帕累托最优投注机制。下注机制可以用来从通过下注来揭示自己信念的代理人那里引出预测。Lambert等人[20,21]引入了加权分数投注机制,这是一类预算平衡的投注机制,在这种机制下,具有不可变信念的智能体如实报告他们的预测。然而,我们证明了这些和其他现有的激励相容的投注机制不是帕累托最优的:即使额外的交易对双方都有利,代理人也有大量的剩余预算。基于这一观察结果,我们设计了一种新的投注机制——双夹持拍卖,这是自适应夹持拍卖的双面版本[9]。研究表明,没有一种下注机制能够同时满足弱预算平衡、个体理性、弱激励相容和帕累托最优。然而,我们证明了双锁定拍卖达到了前三个,并在使用真实竞赛数据的一系列模拟中显示,它比以前已知的激励兼容投注机制更接近帕累托最优,在某些情况下几乎与帕累托最优(但不激励兼容)parimutuel共识机制的效率相匹配。当投注的目标是众包概率时,帕累托最优性驱动参与性,激励兼容性驱动准确性,使得双夹持拍卖成为一种有吸引力且实用的选择。我们的机制可能是独立感兴趣的第一个双边版本的自适应锁定拍卖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信