mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

EFX for Additive Chores: Nonexistence, Pareto Incompatibility, and Bi-Valued Existence

arXiv 2606.08872 ↗First posted 7 Jun 2026cs.GT econ.THcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We consider the fair division problem of indivisible chores and resolve the long-standing open problem for the existence of EFX (envy-free up to any item) allocations with additive cost functions. We show that, even for tri-valued additive cost functions, for every n≥ 4, there exists an instance with n agents where no EFX allocation exists. Our counterexample only uses three types of chores and two types of agents. The numbers of types for chores and agents are both tight: an EFX allocation is known to exist for one type of agents (i.e., with identical cost functions) or two types of chores. We then consider bi-valued instances. We show that, for every n≥ 4, there exists an instance with n agents where every EFX allocation is not Pareto-optimal. This is also the first example showing the incompatibility of EFX and Pareto-optimality when the costs of items are positive: existing examples showing the incompatibility of EFX and Pareto-optimal exploit items with 0 costs. Our result shows such an example exists even for bi-valued instances. The number of agents n is also tight: for n≤ 3, it is known that EFX is compatible with Pareto-optimality. Finally, we also show that an EFX allocation is guaranteed to exist for n=4.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.