RIGA: A Regret-Based Interactive Genetic Algorithm

In this paper, we propose an interactive genetic algorithm for solving multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems under preference imprecision. More precisely, we consider problems where the decision maker's preferences over solutions can be represented by a parameterized aggregation function (e.g., a weighted sum, an OWA operator, a Choquet integral), and we assume that the parameters are initially not known by the recommendation system. In order to quickly make a good recommendation, we combine elicitation and search in the following way: 1) we use regret-based elicitation techniques to reduce the parameter space in a efficient way, 2) genetic operators are applied on parameter instances (instead of solutions) to better explore the parameter space, and 3) we generate promising solutions (population) using existing solving methods designed for the problem with known preferences. Our algorithm, called RIGA, can be applied to any multi-objective combinatorial optimization problem provided that the aggregation function is linear in its parameters and that a (near-)optimal solution can be efficiently determined for the problem with known preferences. We also study its theoretical performances: RIGA can be implemented in such way that it runs in polynomial time while asking no more than a polynomial number of queries. The method is tested on the multi-objective knapsack and traveling salesman problems. For several performance indicators (computation times, gap to optimality and number of queries), RIGA obtains better results than state-of-the-art algorithms.

Finding Fair and Efficient Allocations When Valuations Don't Add Up

In this paper, we present new results on the fair and efficient allocation of indivisible goods to agents that have monotone, submodular, non-additive valuation functions over bundles. Despite their simple structure, these agent valuations are a natural model for several real-world domains. We show that, if such a valuation function has binary marginal gains, a socially optimal (i.e. utilitarian social welfare-maximizing) allocation that achieves envy-freeness up to one item (EF1) exists and is computationally tractable. We also prove that the Nash welfare-maximizing and the leximin allocations both exhibit this fairness-efficiency combination, by showing that they can be achieved by minimizing any symmetric strictly convex function over utilitarian optimal outcomes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first valuation function class not subsumed by additive valuations for which it has been established that an allocation maximizing Nash welfare is EF1. Moreover, for a subclass of these valuation functions based on maximum (unweighted) bipartite matching, we show that a leximin allocation can be computed in polynomial time.

The Price of Diversity in Assignment Problems

We introduce and analyze an extension to the matching problem on a weighted bipartite graph: Assignment with Type Constraints. The two parts of the graph are partitioned into subsets called types and blocks; we seek a matching with the largest sum of weights under the constraint that there is a pre-specified cap on the number of vertices matched in every type-block pair. Our primary motivation stems from the public housing program of Singapore, accounting for over 70% of its residential real estate. To promote ethnic diversity within its housing projects, Singapore imposes ethnicity quotas: each new housing development comprises blocks of flats and each ethnicity-based group in the population must not own more than a certain percentage of flats in a block. Other domains using similar hard capacity constraints include matching prospective students to schools or medical residents to hospitals. Limiting agents' choices for ensuring diversity in this manner naturally entails some welfare loss. One of our goals is to study the trade-off between diversity and social welfare in such settings. We first show that, while the classic assignment program is polynomial-time computable, adding diversity constraints makes it computationally intractable; however, we identify a $\tfrac{1}{2}$-approximation algorithm, as well as reasonable assumptions on the weights that permit poly-time algorithms. Next, we provide two upper bounds on the price of diversity -- a measure of the loss in welfare incurred by imposing diversity constraints -- as functions of natural problem parameters. We conclude the paper with simulations based on publicly available data from two diversity-constrained allocation problems -- Singapore Public Housing and Chicago School Choice -- which shed light on how the constrained maximization as well as lottery-based variants perform in practice.