Fair Allocation of Indivisible Goods: Improvement and Generalization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We study the problem of fair allocation for indivisible goods. We use the the maxmin share paradigm introduced by Budish as a measure for fairness. Procaccia and Wang (EC'14) were first to investigate this fundamental problem in the additive setting. In contrast to what real-world experiments suggest, they show that a maxmin guarantee (1-MMS allocation) is not always possible even when the number of agents is limited to 3. While the existence of an approximation solution (e.g. a 1/2-MMS allocation) is quite straightforward, improving the guarantee becomes subtler for larger constants. Procaccia provide a proof for existence of a 2/3-MMS allocation and leave the question open for better guarantees. Our main contribution is an answer to the above question. We improve the result of [Procaccia and Wang] to a 3/4 factor in the additive setting. The main idea for our 3/4-MMS allocation method is clustering the agents. To this end, we introduce three notions and techniques, namely reducibility, matching allocation, and cycle-envy-freeness, and prove the approximation guarantee of our algorithm via non-trivial applications of these techniques. Our analysis involves coloring and double counting arguments that might be of independent interest. One major shortcoming of the current studies on fair allocation is the additivity assumption on the valuations. We alleviate this by extending our results to the case of submodular, fractionally subadditive, and subadditive settings. More precisely, we give constant approximation guarantees for submodular and XOS agents, and a logarithmic approximation for the case of subadditive agents. Furthermore, we complement our results by providing close upper bounds for each class of valuation functions. Finally, we present algorithms to find such allocations for additive, submodular, and XOS settings in polynomial time.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 4; 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 0; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
9 papers.
- 2021Towards Fair Recommendation in Two-Sided Platformscited by 8
- 2021Fair and Efficient Resource Allocation with Partial Informationcited by 3
- 2021Allocating Indivisible Goods to Strategic Agents: Pure Nash Equilibria and Fairnesscited by 3
- 2022Fair Shares: Feasibility, Domination and Incentivescited by 2
- 2021Guaranteeing Maximin Shares: Some Agents Left Behindcited by 1
- 2023Dividing Good and Better Items Among Agents with Bivalued Submodular Valuationscited by 0
- 2025Probing EFX via PMMS: (Non-)Existence Results in Discrete Fair Divisioncited by 0
- 2025On Approximate MMS Allocations on Restricted Graph Classescited by 0
- 2026Post-Training Fairness Control: A Single-Train Framework for Dynamic Fairness in Recommendationcited by 0
- 2026Post-Training Fairness Control: A Single-Train Framework for Dynamic Fairness in Recommendation28 Jan 2026
- 2025On Approximate MMS Allocations on Restricted Graph Classes8 Aug 2025
- 2025Probing EFX via PMMS: (Non-)Existence Results in Discrete Fair Division20 Jul 2025
- 2023Dividing Good and Better Items Among Agents with Bivalued Submodular Valuations6 Feb 2023
- 2022Fair Shares: Feasibility, Domination and Incentives16 May 2022
- 2021Towards Fair Recommendation in Two-Sided Platforms26 Dec 2021
- 2021Allocating Indivisible Goods to Strategic Agents: Pure Nash Equilibria and Fairness17 Sep 2021
- 2021Fair and Efficient Resource Allocation with Partial Information20 May 2021
- 2021Guaranteeing Maximin Shares: Some Agents Left Behind19 May 2021