summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/problem.tex
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'problem.tex')
-rw-r--r--problem.tex5
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/problem.tex b/problem.tex
index 033c7e1..0b10107 100644
--- a/problem.tex
+++ b/problem.tex
@@ -207,6 +207,11 @@ Ideally, we would like the allocation $S$ to be of maximal value; however, truth
\end{itemize}
%\emph{W.l.o.g.}, we assume in the sequel that costs are at most $B$, \emph{i.e.}, $c_i\in[0,B]$, for all $i\in \mathcal{N}$. This is because, by individual rationality, any $i$ for which $c_i>B$ clearly cannot be allocated; as such, any mechanism that satisfies the above properties ignores such subjects.
+Note that the algorithm given in \eqref{eq:max-algorithm} cannot be used in the
+strategic case. Indeed, it is known that using the MAX operator breaks
+truthfulness in general. A counterexample for the specific value function $V$
+defined in \eqref{obj} is provided in Appendix~\ref{sec:non-monotonicity}.
+
\begin{comment}
As noted in \cite{singer-mechanisms, chen}, budget feasible reverse auctions are \emph{single parameter} auctions: each agent has only one
private value (namely, $c_i$). As such, Myerson's Theorem \cite{myerson} gives