skip to main content
abstract

Enabling Long-term Fairness in Dynamic Resource Allocation

Published:27 June 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We study the fairness of dynamic resource allocation problem under the α-fairness criterion. We recognize two different fairness objectives that naturally arise in this problem: the well-understood slot-fairness objective that aims to ensure fairness at every timeslot, and the less explored horizon-fairness objective that aims to ensure fairness across utilities accumulated over a time horizon. We argue that horizon-fairness comes at a lower price in terms of social welfare. We study horizon-fairness with the regret as a performance metric and show that vanishing regret cannot be achieved in presence of an unrestricted adversary. We propose restrictions on the adversary's capabilities corresponding to realistic scenarios and an online policy that indeed guarantees vanishing regret under these restrictions.

References

  1. Daron Anderson, George Iosifidis, and Douglas J Leith. 2022. Lazy Lagrangians with Predictions for Online Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.02890 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Santiago R Balseiro, Haihao Lu, and Vahab Mirrokni. 2022. The best of many worlds: Dual mirror descent for online allocation problems. Operations Research (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C. Joe-Wong, S. Sen, T. Lan, and M. Chiang. 2013. Multiresource Allocation: Fairness-Efficiency Tradeoffs in a Unifying Framework. IEEE/ACM Trans. on Networking, Vol. 21, 6 (2013), 1785--1798.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. John C Duchi, Alekh Agarwal, Mikael Johansson, and Michael I Jordan. 2012. Ergodic mirror descent. SIAM Journal on Optimization, Vol. 22, 4 (2012), 1549--1578.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Francis Ysidro Edgeworth et al. 1881. Mathematical Psychics. History of Economic Thought Books (1881).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. F.P. Kelly, A. Maulloo, and D. Tan. 1998. Rate Control for Communication Networks: Shadow Prices, Proportional Fairness, and Stability. J. Oper. Res. Soc., Vol. 49, 3 (1998), 237--252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Swati Gupta and Vijay Kamble. 2021. Individual Fairness in Hindsight. J. Mach. Learn. Res., Vol. 22, 144 (2021), 1--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Elad Hazan. 2016. Introduction to Online Convex Optimization. Foundations and Trends® in Optimization, Vol. 2, 3--4 (Aug. 2016), 157--325.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Devansh Jalota and Yinyu Ye. 2022. Online Learning in Fisher Markets with Unknown Agent Preferences. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.00825 (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Ehud Kalai, Meir Smorodinsky, et al. 1975. Other Solutions to Nash's Bargaining Problem. Econometrica, Vol. 43, 3 (1975), 513--518.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Luofeng Liao, Yuan Gao, and Christian Kroer. 2022. Nonstationary Dual Averaging and Online Fair Allocation. ArXiv e-prints (Feb. 2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Shie Mannor, John N Tsitsiklis, and Jia Yuan Yu. 2009. Online Learning with Sample Path Constraints. Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 10, 3 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jeonghoon Mo and Jean Walrand. 2000. Fair End-to-End Window-Based Congestion Control. IEEE/ACM Transactions on networking, Vol. 8, 5 (2000), 556--567.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Dritan Nace and Michal Pioro. 2008. Max-min fairness and its applications to routing and load-balancing in communication networks: a tutorial. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Vol. 10, 4 (2008), 5--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. John F. Nash. 1950. The Bargaining Problem. Econometrica, Vol. 18, 2 (1950), 155--162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Bozidar Radunovic and Jean-Yves Le Boudec. 2007. A unified framework for max-min and min-max fairness with applications. IEEE/ACM Transactions on networking, Vol. 15, 5 (2007), 1073--1083.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Resource Allocation and Cross Layer Control in Wireless Networks. 2006. L. Georgiadis, M. J. Neely, and L. Tassiulas. Found. Trends Netw., Vol. 1, 1 (2006), 1--143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Adrian Rivera, He Wang, and Huan Xu. 2018. The Online Saddle Point Problem and Online Convex Optimization with Knapsacks. preprint arXiv:1806.08301 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Sean R. Sinclair, Siddhartha Banerjee, and Christina Lee Yu. 2022. Sequential Fair Allocation: Achieving the Optimal Envy-Efficiency Tradeoff Curve. SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev., Vol. 50, 1 (jun 2022), 95--96.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. T. Bonald, and J. W. Roberts. 2015. Multi-Resource Fairness: Objectives, Algorithms and Performance. In ACM Sigmetrics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. W. Wang, B. Li, and B. Liang. 2014. Dominant Resource Fairness in Cloud Computing Systems with Heterogeneous Servers. In IEEE INFOCOM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. X. Lin, N. B. Shroff, and R. Srikant. 2006. A Tutorial on Cross-Layer Optimization in Wireless Networks. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., Vol. 24, 8 (2006), 1452--1463.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Yu-Hang Zhou, Chen Liang, Nan Li, Cheng Yang, Shenghuo Zhu, and Rong Jin. 2019. Robust online matching with user arrival distribution drift. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 33. 459--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Enabling Long-term Fairness in Dynamic Resource Allocation

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review
          ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review  Volume 51, Issue 1
          SIGMETRICS '23
          June 2023
          108 pages
          ISSN:0163-5999
          DOI:10.1145/3606376
          Issue’s Table of Contents
          • cover image ACM Conferences
            SIGMETRICS '23: Abstract Proceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGMETRICS International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems
            June 2023
            123 pages
            ISBN:9798400700743
            DOI:10.1145/3578338

          Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 27 June 2023

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • abstract
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)80
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader