Search

We study online Bayesian persuasion problems in which an informed sender repeatedly faces a receiver with the goal of influencing their behavior through the provision of payoff-relevant information. Previous works assume that the sender has knowledge about either the prior distribution over states of nature or receiver's utilities, or both. We relax such unrealistic assumptions by considering settings in which the sender does not know anything about the prior and the receiver. We design an algorithm that achieves sublinear regret with respect to an optimal signaling scheme, and we also provide a collection of lower bounds showing that the guarantees of such an algorithm are tight. Our algorithm works by searching a suitable space of signaling schemes in order to learn receiver's best responses. To do this, we leverage a non-standard representation of signaling schemes that allows to cleverly overcome the challenge of not knowing anything about the prior over states of nature and receiver's utilities. Finally, our results also allow to derive lower/upper bounds on the sample complexity of learning signaling schemes in a related Bayesian persuasion PAC-learning problem.

We investigate the role of constraints in the computational complexity of min-max optimization. The work of Daskalakis, Skoulakis, and Zampetakis [2021] was the first to study min-max optimization through the lens of computational complexity, showing that min-max problems with nonconvex-nonconcave objectives are PPAD-hard. However, their proof hinges on the presence of joint constraints between the maximizing and minimizing players. The main goal of this paper is to understand the role of these constraints in min-max optimization. The first contribution of this paper is a fundamentally new proof of their main result, which improves it in multiple directions: it holds for degree 2 polynomials, it is essentially tight in the parameters, and it is much simpler than previous approaches, clearly highlighting the role of constraints in the hardness of the problem. Second, we show that with general constraints (i.e., the min player and max player have different constraints), even convex-concave min-max optimization becomes PPAD-hard. Along the way, we also provide PPAD-membership of a general problem related to quasi-variational inequalities, which has applications beyond our problem.

We study principal-agent problems where a farsighted agent takes costly actions in an MDP. The core challenge in these settings is that agent's actions are hidden to the principal, who can only observe their outcomes, namely state transitions and their associated rewards. Thus, the principal's goal is to devise a policy that incentives the agent to take actions leading to desirable outcomes. This is accomplished by committing to a payment scheme (a.k.a. contract) at each step, specifying a monetary transfer from the principal to the agent for every possible outcome. Interestingly, we show that Markovian policies are unfit in these settings, as they do not allow to achieve the optimal principal's utility and are constitutionally intractable. Thus, accounting for history in unavoidable, and this begets considerable additional challenges compared to standard MDPs. Nevertheless, we design an efficient algorithm to compute an optimal policy, leveraging a compact way of representing histories for this purpose. Unfortunately, the policy produced by such an algorithm cannot be readily implemented, as it is only approximately incentive compatible, meaning that the agent is incentivized to take the desired actions only approximately. To fix this, we design an efficient method to make such a policy incentive compatible, by only introducing a negligible loss in principal's utility. This method can be generally applied to any approximately-incentive-compatible policy, and it generalized a related approach that has already been discovered for classical principal-agent problems to more general settings in MDPs.

We study online learning in \emph{constrained MDPs} (CMDPs), focusing on the goal of attaining sublinear strong regret and strong cumulative constraint violation. Differently from their standard (weak) counterparts, these metrics do not allow negative terms to compensate positive ones, raising considerable additional challenges. Efroni et al. (2020) were the first to propose an algorithm with sublinear strong regret and strong violation, by exploiting linear programming. Thus, their algorithm is highly inefficient, leaving as an open problem achieving sublinear bounds by means of policy optimization methods, which are much more efficient in practice. Very recently, Muller et al. (2024) have partially addressed this problem by proposing a policy optimization method that allows to attain $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(T^{0.93})$ strong regret/violation. This still leaves open the question of whether optimal bounds are achievable by using an approach of this kind. We answer such a question affirmatively, by providing an efficient policy optimization algorithm with $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ strong regret/violation. Our algorithm implements a primal-dual scheme that employs a state-of-the-art policy optimization approach for adversarial (unconstrained) MDPs as primal algorithm, and a UCB-like update for dual variables., Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2405.14372

We study online learning in constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) in which rewards and constraints may be either stochastic or adversarial. In such settings, Stradi et al.(2024) proposed the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm able to seamlessly handle stochastic and adversarial constraints, achieving optimal regret and constraint violation bounds in both cases. This algorithm suffers from two major drawbacks. First, it only works under full feedback, which severely limits its applicability in practice. Moreover, it relies on optimizing over the space of occupancy measures, which requires solving convex optimization problems, an highly inefficient task. In this paper, we provide the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm for CMDPs with bandit feedback. Specifically, when the constraints are stochastic, the algorithm achieves $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ regret and constraint violation, while, when they are adversarial, it attains $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(\sqrt{T})$ constraint violation and a tight fraction of the optimal reward. Moreover, our algorithm is based on a policy optimization approach, which is much more efficient than occupancy-measure-based methods.

Rested and Restless Bandits are two well-known bandit settings that are useful to model real-world sequential decision-making problems in which the expected reward of an arm evolves over time due to the actions we perform or due to the nature. In this work, we propose Graph-Triggered Bandits (GTBs), a unifying framework to generalize and extend rested and restless bandits. In this setting, the evolution of the arms' expected rewards is governed by a graph defined over the arms. An edge connecting a pair of arms $(i,j)$ represents the fact that a pull of arm $i$ triggers the evolution of arm $j$, and vice versa. Interestingly, rested and restless bandits are both special cases of our model for some suitable (degenerated) graph. As relevant case studies for this setting, we focus on two specific types of monotonic bandits: rising, where the expected reward of an arm grows as the number of triggers increases, and rotting, where the opposite behavior occurs. For these cases, we study the optimal policies. We provide suitable algorithms for all scenarios and discuss their theoretical guarantees, highlighting the complexity of the learning problem concerning instance-dependent terms that encode specific properties of the underlying graph structure.

In this paper, we initiate the computational problem of jointly designing information and contracts. We consider three possible classes of contracts with decreasing flexibility and increasing simplicity: ambiguous contracts, menus of explicit contracts and explicit single contract. Ambiguous contracts allow the principal to conceal the applied payment schemes through a contract that depends on the unknown state of nature, while explicit contracts reveal the contract prior to the agent's decision. Our results show a trade-off between the simplicity of the contracts and the computational complexity of the joint design. Indeed, we show that an approximately-optimal mechanism with ambiguous contracts can be computed in polynomial time. However, they are convoluted mechanisms and not well-suited for some real-world scenarios. Conversely, explicit menus of contracts and single contracts are simpler mechanisms, but they cannot be computed efficiently. In particular, we show that computing the optimal mechanism with explicit menus of contracts and single contracts is APX-Hard. We also characterize the structure of optimal mechanisms. Interestingly, direct mechanisms are optimal for both the most flexible ambiguous contracts and the least flexible explicit single contract, but they are suboptimal for that with menus of contracts. Finally, motivated by our hardness results, we turn our attention to menus of linear contracts and single linear contracts. We show that both the problem of computing the optimal mechanism with an explicit menu of linear contracts and an explicit single linear contract admits an FPTAS., Comment: contract design, information design

Bilateral trade models the problem of facilitating trades between a seller and a buyer having private valuations for the item being sold. In the online version of the problem, the learner faces a new seller and buyer at each time step, and has to post a price for each of the two parties without any knowledge of their valuations. We consider a scenario where, at each time step, before posting prices the learner observes a context vector containing information about the features of the item for sale. The valuations of both the seller and the buyer follow an unknown linear function of the context. In this setting, the learner could leverage previous transactions in an attempt to estimate private valuations. We characterize the regret regimes of different settings, taking as a baseline the best context-dependent prices in hindsight. First, in the setting in which the learner has two-bit feedback and strong budget balance constraints, we propose an algorithm with $O(\log T)$ regret. Then, we study the same set-up with noisy valuations, providing a tight $\widetilde O(T^{\frac23})$ regret upper bound. Finally, we show that loosening budget balance constraints allows the learner to operate under more restrictive feedback. Specifically, we show how to address the one-bit, global budget balance setting through a reduction from the two-bit, strong budget balance setup. This established a fundamental trade-off between the quality of the feedback and the strictness of the budget constraints.

We address a generalization of the bandit with knapsacks problem, where a learner aims to maximize rewards while satisfying an arbitrary set of long-term constraints. Our goal is to design best-of-both-worlds algorithms that perform optimally under both stochastic and adversarial constraints. Previous works address this problem via primal-dual methods, and require some stringent assumptions, namely the Slater's condition, and in adversarial settings, they either assume knowledge of a lower bound on the Slater's parameter, or impose strong requirements on the primal and dual regret minimizers such as requiring weak adaptivity. We propose an alternative and more natural approach based on optimistic estimations of the constraints. Surprisingly, we show that estimating the constraints with an UCB-like approach guarantees optimal performances. Our algorithm consists of two main components: (i) a regret minimizer working on \emph{moving strategy sets} and (ii) an estimate of the feasible set as an optimistic weighted empirical mean of previous samples. The key challenge in this approach is designing adaptive weights that meet the different requirements for stochastic and adversarial constraints. Our algorithm is significantly simpler than previous approaches, and has a cleaner analysis. Moreover, ours is the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm providing bounds logarithmic in the number of constraints. Additionally, in stochastic settings, it provides $\widetilde O(\sqrt{T})$ regret \emph{without} Slater's condition.

In constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) with adversarial rewards and constraints, a well-known impossibility result prevents any algorithm from attaining both sublinear regret and sublinear constraint violation, when competing against a best-in-hindsight policy that satisfies constraints on average. In this paper, we show that this negative result can be eased in CMDPs with non-stationary rewards and constraints, by providing algorithms whose performances smoothly degrade as non-stationarity increases. Specifically, we propose algorithms attaining $\tilde{\mathcal{O}} (\sqrt{T} + C)$ regret and positive constraint violation under bandit feedback, where $C$ is a corruption value measuring the environment non-stationarity. This can be $\Theta(T)$ in the worst case, coherently with the impossibility result for adversarial CMDPs. First, we design an algorithm with the desired guarantees when $C$ is known. Then, in the case $C$ is unknown, we show how to obtain the same results by embedding such an algorithm in a general meta-procedure. This is of independent interest, as it can be applied to any non-stationary constrained online learning setting.

Stackelberg games (SGs) constitute the most fundamental and acclaimed models of strategic interactions involving some form of commitment. Moreover, they form the basis of more elaborate models of this kind, such as, e.g., Bayesian persuasion and principal-agent problems. Addressing learning tasks in SGs and related models is crucial to operationalize them in practice, where model parameters are usually unknown. In this paper, we revise the sample complexity of learning an optimal strategy to commit to in SGs. We provide a novel algorithm that (i) does not require any of the limiting assumptions made by state-of-the-art approaches and (ii) deals with a trade-off between sample complexity and termination probability arising when leader's strategies representation has finite precision. Such a trade-off has been completely neglected by existing algorithms and, if not properly managed, it may result in them using exponentially-many samples. Our algorithm requires novel techniques, which also pave the way to addressing learning problems in other models with commitment ubiquitous in the real world.

In the bandits with knapsacks framework (BwK) the learner has $m$ resource-consumption (packing) constraints. We focus on the generalization of BwK in which the learner has a set of general long-term constraints. The goal of the learner is to maximize their cumulative reward, while at the same time achieving small cumulative constraints violations. In this scenario, there exist simple instances where conventional methods for BwK fail to yield sublinear violations of constraints. We show that it is possible to circumvent this issue by requiring the primal and dual algorithm to be weakly adaptive. Indeed, even in absence on any information on the Slater's parameter $\rho$ characterizing the problem, the interplay between weakly adaptive primal and dual regret minimizers yields a "self-bounding" property of dual variables. In particular, their norm remains suitably upper bounded across the entire time horizon even without explicit projection steps. By exploiting this property, we provide best-of-both-worlds guarantees for stochastic and adversarial inputs. In the first case, we show that the algorithm guarantees sublinear regret. In the latter case, we establish a tight competitive ratio of $\rho/(1+\rho)$. In both settings, constraints violations are guaranteed to be sublinear in time. Finally, this results allow us to obtain new result for the problem of contextual bandits with linear constraints, providing the first no-$\alpha$-regret guarantees for adversarial contexts.

The main result of this paper is an almost approximation-preserving polynomial-time reduction from the most general multi-parameter Bayesian contract design (BCD) to single-parameter BCD. That is, for any multi-parameter BCD instance $I^M$, we construct a single-parameter instance $I^S$ such that any $\beta$-approximate contract (resp. menu of contracts) of $I^S$ can in turn be converted to a $(\beta -\epsilon)$-approximate contract (resp. menu of contracts) of $I^M$. The reduction is in time polynomial in the input size and $\log(\frac{1}{\epsilon})$; moreover, when $\beta = 1$ (i.e., the given single-parameter solution is exactly optimal), the dependence on $\frac{1}{\epsilon}$ can be removed, leading to a polynomial-time exact reduction. This efficient reduction is somewhat surprising because in the closely related problem of Bayesian mechanism design, a polynomial-time reduction from multi-parameter to single-parameter setting is believed to not exist. Our result demonstrates the intrinsic difficulty of addressing moral hazard in Bayesian contract design, regardless of being single-parameter or multi-parameter. As byproducts, our reduction answers two open questions in recent literature of algorithmic contract design: (a) it implies that optimal contract design in single-parameter BCD is not in APX unless P=NP even when the agent's type distribution is regular, answering the open question of [Alon et al. 2021] in the negative; (b) it implies that the principal's (order-wise) tight utility gap between using a menu of contracts and a single contract is $\Theta(n)$ where $n$ is the number of actions, answering the major open question of [Guruganesh et al. 2021] for the single-parameter case., Comment: update some results

We study online learning problems in constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs) with adversarial losses and stochastic hard constraints. We consider two different scenarios. In the first one, we address general CMDPs, where we design an algorithm that attains sublinear regret and cumulative positive constraints violation. In the second scenario, under the mild assumption that a policy strictly satisfying the constraints exists and is known to the learner, we design an algorithm that achieves sublinear regret while ensuring that the constraints are satisfied at every episode with high probability. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first to study CMDPs involving both adversarial losses and hard constraints. Indeed, previous works either focus on much weaker soft constraints--allowing for positive violation to cancel out negative ones--or are restricted to stochastic losses. Thus, our algorithms can deal with general non-stationary environments subject to requirements much stricter than those manageable with state-of-the-art algorithms. This enables their adoption in a much wider range of real-world applications, ranging from autonomous driving to online advertising and recommender systems.

We study the problem faced by a service provider that has to sell services to a user. In our model the service provider proposes various payment options (a menu) to the user which may be based, for example, on the quality of the service. Then, the user chooses one of these options and pays an amount to the service provider, contingent on the observed final outcome. Users are not able to observe directly the action performed by the service provide to reach the final outcome. This might incentivize misconduct. Therefore, we propose a model that enforces trust through economics incentives. The problem has two crucial features: i) the service provider is responsible for both formulating the contract and performing the action for which the user issues payments, and ii) the user is unaware of the true action carried out by the service provider, which is hidden. We study this delegation problem through the lens of contract design, with the overarching goal of enabling the computation of contracts that guarantee that the user can trust the service provider, even if their action is hidden.

We study hidden-action principal-agent problems with multiple agents. Unlike previous work, we consider a general setting in which each agent has an arbitrary number of actions, and the joint action induces outcomes according to an arbitrary distribution. We study two classes of mechanisms: a class of deterministic mechanisms that is the natural extension of single-agent contracts, in which the agents play a Nash equilibrium of the game induced by the contract, and a class of randomized mechanisms that is inspired by single-agent randomized contracts and correlated equilibria.

We study the fundamental problem of designing contracts in principal-agent problems under uncertainty. Previous works mostly addressed Bayesian settings in which principal's uncertainty is modeled as a probability distribution over agent's types. In this paper, we study a setting in which the principal has no distributional information about agent's type. In particular, in our setting, the principal only knows some uncertainty set defining possible agent's action costs. Thus, the principal takes a robust (adversarial) approach by trying to design contracts which minimize the (additive) regret: the maximum difference between what the principal could have obtained had them known agent's costs and what they actually get under the selected contract.

In Bayesian persuasion, an informed sender strategically discloses information to a receiver so as to persuade them to undertake desirable actions. Recently, a growing attention has been devoted to settings in which sender and receivers interact sequentially. Recently, Markov persuasion processes (MPPs) have been introduced to capture sequential scenarios where a sender faces a stream of myopic receivers in a Markovian environment. The MPPs studied so far in the literature suffer from issues that prevent them from being fully operational in practice, e.g., they assume that the sender knows receivers' rewards. We fix such issues by addressing MPPs where the sender has no knowledge about the environment. We design a learning algorithm for the sender, working with partial feedback. We prove that its regret with respect to an optimal information-disclosure policy grows sublinearly in the number of episodes, as it is the case for the loss in persuasiveness cumulated while learning. Moreover, we provide a lower bound for our setting matching the guarantees of our algorithm.

Bilateral trade models the problem of intermediating between two rational agents -- a seller and a buyer -- both characterized by a private valuation for an item they want to trade. We study the online learning version of the problem, in which at each time step a new seller and buyer arrive and the learner has to set prices for them without any knowledge about their (adversarially generated) valuations. In this setting, known impossibility results rule out the existence of no-regret algorithms when budget balanced has to be enforced at each time step. In this paper, we introduce the notion of \emph{global budget balance}, which only requires the learner to fulfill budget balance over the entire time horizon. Under this natural relaxation, we provide the first no-regret algorithms for adversarial bilateral trade under various feedback models. First, we show that in the full-feedback model, the learner can guarantee $\tilde O(\sqrt{T})$ regret against the best fixed prices in hindsight, and that this bound is optimal up to poly-logarithmic terms. Second, we provide a learning algorithm guaranteeing a $\tilde O(T^{3/4})$ regret upper bound with one-bit feedback, which we complement with a $\Omega(T^{5/7})$ lower bound that holds even in the two-bit feedback model. Finally, we introduce and analyze an alternative benchmark that is provably stronger than the best fixed prices in hindsight and is inspired by the literature on bandits with knapsacks., Comment: Accepted at STOC 2024

We study principal-agent problems in which a principal commits to an outcome-dependent payment scheme -- called contract -- in order to induce an agent to take a costly, unobservable action leading to favorable outcomes. We consider a generalization of the classical (single-round) version of the problem in which the principal interacts with the agent by committing to contracts over multiple rounds. The principal has no information about the agent, and they have to learn an optimal contract by only observing the outcome realized at each round. We focus on settings in which the size of the agent's action space is small. We design an algorithm that learns an approximately-optimal contract with high probability in a number of rounds polynomial in the size of the outcome space, when the number of actions is constant. Our algorithm solves an open problem by Zhu et al.[2022]. Moreover, it can also be employed to provide a $\tilde{\mathcal{O}}(T^{4/5})$ regret bound in the related online learning setting in which the principal aims at maximizing their cumulative utility, thus considerably improving previously-known regret bounds.

We investigate the mechanism design problem faced by a principal who hires \emph{multiple} agents to gather and report costly information. Then, the principal exploits the information to make an informed decision. We model this problem as a game, where the principal announces a mechanism consisting in action recommendations and a payment function, a.k.a. scoring rule. Then, each agent chooses an effort level and receives partial information about an underlying state of nature based on the effort. Finally, the agents report the information (possibly non-truthfully), the principal takes a decision based on this information, and the agents are paid according to the scoring rule. While previous work focuses on single-agent problems, we consider multi-agents settings. This poses the challenge of coordinating the agents' efforts and aggregating correlated information. Indeed, we show that optimal mechanisms must correlate agents' efforts, which introduces externalities among the agents, and hence complex incentive compatibility constraints and equilibrium selection problems. First, we design a polynomial-time algorithm to find an optimal incentive compatible mechanism. Then, we study an online problem, where the principal repeatedly interacts with a group of unknown agents. We design a no-regret algorithm that provides $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(T^{2/3})$ regret with respect to an optimal mechanism, matching the state-of-the-art bound for single-agent settings.

Bayesian persuasion studies the problem faced by an informed sender who strategically discloses information to influence the behavior of an uninformed receiver. Recently, a growing attention has been devoted to settings where the sender and the receiver interact sequentially, in which the receiver's decision-making problem is usually modeled as a Markov decision process (MDP). However, previous works focused on computing optimal information-revelation policies (a.k.a. signaling schemes) under the restrictive assumption that the receiver acts myopically, selecting actions to maximize the one-step utility and disregarding future rewards. This is justified by the fact that, when the receiver is farsighted and thus considers future rewards, finding an optimal Markovian signaling scheme is NP-hard. In this paper, we show that Markovian signaling schemes do not constitute the "right" class of policies. Indeed, differently from most of the MDPs settings, we prove that Markovian signaling schemes are not optimal, and general history-dependent signaling schemes should be considered. Moreover, we also show that history-dependent signaling schemes circumvent the negative complexity results affecting Markovian signaling schemes. Formally, we design an algorithm that computes an optimal and {\epsilon}-persuasive history-dependent signaling scheme in time polynomial in 1/{\epsilon} and in the instance size. The crucial challenge is that general history-dependent signaling schemes cannot be represented in polynomial space. Nevertheless, we introduce a convenient subclass of history-dependent signaling schemes, called promise-form, which are as powerful as general history-dependent ones and efficiently representable. Intuitively, promise-form signaling schemes compactly encode histories in the form of honest promises on future receiver's rewards.

The bandits with knapsack (BwK) framework models online decision-making problems in which an agent makes a sequence of decisions subject to resource consumption constraints. The traditional model assumes that each action consumes a non-negative amount of resources and the process ends when the initial budgets are fully depleted. We study a natural generalization of the BwK framework which allows non-monotonic resource utilization, i.e., resources can be replenished by a positive amount. We propose a best-of-both-worlds primal-dual template that can handle any online learning problem with replenishment for which a suitable primal regret minimizer exists. In particular, we provide the first positive results for the case of adversarial inputs by showing that our framework guarantees a constant competitive ratio $\alpha$ when $B=\Omega(T)$ or when the possible per-round replenishment is a positive constant. Moreover, under a stochastic input model, our algorithm yields an instance-independent $\tilde{O}(T^{1/2})$ regret bound which complements existing instance-dependent bounds for the same setting. Finally, we provide applications of our framework to some economic problems of practical relevance.

We study online learning in episodic constrained Markov decision processes (CMDPs), where the learner aims at collecting as much reward as possible over the episodes, while satisfying some long-term constraints during the learning process. Rewards and constraints can be selected either stochastically or adversarially, and the transition function is not known to the learner. While online learning in classical (unconstrained) MDPs has received considerable attention over the last years, the setting of CMDPs is still largely unexplored. This is surprising, since in real-world applications, such as, e.g., autonomous driving, automated bidding, and recommender systems, there are usually additional constraints and specifications that an agent has to obey during the learning process. In this paper, we provide the first best-of-both-worlds algorithm for CMDPs with long-term constraints, in the flavor of Balseiro et al. (2023). Our algorithm is capable of handling settings in which rewards and constraints are selected either stochastically or adversarially, without requiring any knowledge of the underling process. Moreover, our algorithm matches state-of-the-art regret and constraint violation bounds for settings in which constraints are selected stochastically, while it is the first to provide guarantees in the case in which they are chosen adversarially.

Bayesian persuasion studies how an informed sender should influence beliefs of rational receivers who take decisions through Bayesian updating of a common prior. We focus on the online Bayesian persuasion framework, in which the sender repeatedly faces one or more receivers with unknown and adversarially selected types. First, we show how to obtain a tight $\tilde O(T^{1/2})$ regret bound in the case in which the sender faces a single receiver and has partial feedback, improving over the best previously known bound of $\tilde O(T^{4/5})$. Then, we provide the first no-regret guarantees for the multi-receiver setting under partial feedback. Finally, we show how to design no-regret algorithms with polynomial per-iteration running time by exploiting type reporting, thereby circumventing known intractability results on online Bayesian persuasion. We provide efficient algorithms guaranteeing a $O(T^{1/2})$ regret upper bound both in the single- and multi-receiver scenario when type reporting is allowed.

We study the problem of designing mechanisms for \emph{information acquisition} scenarios. This setting models strategic interactions between an uniformed \emph{receiver} and a set of informed \emph{senders}. In our model the senders receive information about the underlying state of nature and communicate their observation (either truthfully or not) to the receiver, which, based on this information, selects an action. Our goal is to design mechanisms maximizing the receiver's utility while incentivizing the senders to report truthfully their information. First, we provide an algorithm that efficiently computes an optimal \emph{incentive compatible} (IC) mechanism. Then, we focus on the \emph{online} problem in which the receiver sequentially interacts in an unknown game, with the objective of minimizing the \emph{cumulative regret} w.r.t. the optimal IC mechanism, and the \emph{cumulative violation} of the incentive compatibility constraints. We investigate two different online scenarios, \emph{i.e.,} the \emph{full} and \emph{bandit feedback} settings. For the full feedback problem, we propose an algorithm that guarantees $\tilde{\mathcal O}(\sqrt T)$ regret and violation, while for the bandit feedback setting we present an algorithm that attains $\tilde{\mathcal O}(T^{\alpha})$ regret and $\tilde{\mathcal O}(T^{1-\alpha/2})$ violation for any $\alpha\in[1/2, 1]$. Finally, we complement our results providing a tight lower bound.

We study online learning problems in which a decision maker has to make a sequence of costly decisions, with the goal of maximizing their expected reward while adhering to budget and return-on-investment (ROI) constraints. Existing primal-dual algorithms designed for constrained online learning problems under adversarial inputs rely on two fundamental assumptions. First, the decision maker must know beforehand the value of parameters related to the degree of strict feasibility of the problem (i.e. Slater parameters). Second, a strictly feasible solution to the offline optimization problem must exist at each round. Both requirements are unrealistic for practical applications such as bidding in online ad auctions. In this paper, we show how such assumptions can be circumvented by endowing standard primal-dual templates with weakly adaptive regret minimizers. This results in a ``dual-balancing'' framework which ensures that dual variables stay sufficiently small, even in the absence of knowledge about Slater's parameter. We prove the first best-of-both-worlds no-regret guarantees which hold in absence of the two aforementioned assumptions, under stochastic and adversarial inputs. Finally, we show how to instantiate the framework to optimally bid in various mechanisms of practical relevance, such as first- and second-price auctions.

We study the algorithmic problem faced by an information holder (seller) who wants to optimally sell such information to a budged-constrained decision maker (buyer) that has to undertake some action. Differently from previous, we consider the case in which the seller is an interested party, as the action chosen by the buyer does not only influence their utility, but also seller's one. This happens in many real-world settings, where the way in which businesses use acquired information may positively or negatively affect the seller, due to the presence of externalities on the information market. The utilities of both the seller and the buyer depend on a random state of nature, which is revealed to the seller, but it is unknown to the buyer. Thus, the seller's goal is to (partially) sell their information about the state of nature to the buyer, so as to concurrently maximize revenue and induce the buyer to take a desirable action. We study settings in which buyer's budget and utilities are determined by a random buyer's type that is unknown to the seller. In such settings, an optimal protocol for the seller must propose to the buyer a menu of information-revelation policies to choose from, with the latter acquiring one of them by paying its corresponding price. Moreover, since in our model the seller is an interested party, an optimal protocol must also prescribe the seller to pay back the buyer contingently on their action. First, we show that the problem of computing a seller-optimal protocol can be solved in polynomial time. Next, we switch the attention to the case in which a seller's protocol employs a single information-revelation policy, rather than proposing a menu, deriving both positive and negative results.

We study hidden-action principal-agent problems with multiple agents. These are problems in which a principal commits to an outcome-dependent payment scheme in order to incentivize some agents to take costly, unobservable actions that lead to favorable outcomes. Previous works on multi-agent problems study models where the principal observes a single outcome determined by the actions of all the agents. Such models considerably limit the contracting power of the principal, since payments can only depend on the joint result of all the agents' actions, and there is no way of paying each agent for their individual result. In this paper, we consider a model in which each agent determines their own individual outcome as an effect of their action only, the principal observes all the individual outcomes separately, and they perceive a reward that jointly depends on all these outcomes. This considerably enhances the principal's contracting capabilities, by allowing them to pay each agent on the basis of their individual result. We analyze the computational complexity of finding principal-optimal contracts, revolving around two newly-introduced properties of principal's rewards, which we call IR-supermodularity and DR-submodularity. Intuitively, the former captures settings with increasing returns, where the rewards grow faster as the agents' effort increases, while the latter models the case of diminishing returns, in which rewards grow slower instead. These two properties naturally model two common real-world phenomena, namely diseconomies and economies of scale. In this paper, we first address basic instances in which the principal knows everything about the agents, and, then, more general Bayesian instances where each agent has their own private type determining their features, such as action costs and how actions stochastically determine individual outcomes.

The computational study of equilibria involving constraints on players' strategies has been largely neglected. However, in real-world applications, players are usually subject to constraints ruling out the feasibility of some of their strategies, such as, e.g., safety requirements and budget caps. Computational studies on constrained versions of the Nash equilibrium have lead to some results under very stringent assumptions, while finding constrained versions of the correlated equilibrium (CE) is still unexplored. In this paper, we introduce and computationally characterize constrained Phi-equilibria -- a more general notion than constrained CEs -- in normal-form games. We show that computing such equilibria is in general computationally intractable, and also that the set of the equilibria may not be convex, providing a sharp divide with unconstrained CEs. Nevertheless, we provide a polynomial-time algorithm for computing a constrained (approximate) Phi-equilibrium maximizing a given linear function, when either the number of constraints or that of players' actions is fixed. Moreover, in the special case in which a player's constraints do not depend on other players' strategies, we show that an exact, function-maximizing equilibrium can be computed in polynomial time, while one (approximate) equilibrium can be found with an efficient decentralized no-regret learning algorithm.

We study online learning problems in which a decision maker has to take a sequence of decisions subject to $m$ long-term constraints. The goal of the decision maker is to maximize their total reward, while at the same time achieving small cumulative constraints violation across the $T$ rounds. We present the first best-of-both-world type algorithm for this general class of problems, with no-regret guarantees both in the case in which rewards and constraints are selected according to an unknown stochastic model, and in the case in which they are selected at each round by an adversary. Our algorithm is the first to provide guarantees in the adversarial setting with respect to the optimal fixed strategy that satisfies the long-term constraints. In particular, it guarantees a $\rho/(1+\rho)$ fraction of the optimal reward and sublinear regret, where $\rho$ is a feasibility parameter related to the existence of strictly feasible solutions. Our framework employs traditional regret minimizers as black-box components. Therefore, by instantiating it with an appropriate choice of regret minimizers it can handle the full-feedback as well as the bandit-feedback setting. Moreover, it allows the decision maker to seamlessly handle scenarios with non-convex rewards and constraints. We show how our framework can be applied in the context of budget-management mechanisms for repeated auctions in order to guarantee long-term constraints that are not packing (e.g., ROI constraints).

We study a repeated information design problem faced by an informed sender who tries to influence the behavior of a self-interested receiver. We consider settings where the receiver faces a sequential decision making (SDM) problem. At each round, the sender observes the realizations of random events in the SDM problem. This begets the challenge of how to incrementally disclose such information to the receiver to persuade them to follow (desirable) action recommendations. We study the case in which the sender does not know random events probabilities, and, thus, they have to gradually learn them while persuading the receiver. We start by providing a non-trivial polytopal approximation of the set of sender's persuasive information structures. This is crucial to design efficient learning algorithms. Next, we prove a negative result: no learning algorithm can be persuasive. Thus, we relax persuasiveness requirements by focusing on algorithms that guarantee that the receiver's regret in following recommendations grows sub-linearly. In the full-feedback setting -- where the sender observes all random events realizations -- , we provide an algorithm with $\tilde{O}(\sqrt{T})$ regret for both the sender and the receiver. Instead, in the bandit-feedback setting -- where the sender only observes the realizations of random events actually occurring in the SDM problem -- , we design an algorithm that, given an $\alpha \in [1/2, 1]$ as input, ensures $\tilde{O}({T^\alpha})$ and $\tilde{O}( T^{\max \{ \alpha, 1-\frac{\alpha}{2} \} })$ regrets, for the sender and the receiver respectively. This result is complemented by a lower bound showing that such a regrets trade-off is essentially tight.

The increasing competition in digital advertising induced a proliferation of media agencies playing the role of intermediaries between advertisers and platforms selling ad slots. When a group of competing advertisers is managed by a common agency, many forms of collusion, such as bid rigging, can be implemented by coordinating bidding strategies, dramatically increasing advertisers' value. We study the problem of finding bids and monetary transfers maximizing the utility of a group of colluders, under GSP and VCG mechanisms. First, we introduce an abstract bid optimization problem -- called weighted utility problem (WUP) -- , which is useful in proving our results. We show that the utilities of bidding strategies are related to the length of paths in a directed acyclic weighted graph, whose structure and weights depend on the mechanism under study. This allows us to solve WUP in polynomial time by finding a shortest path of the graph. Next, we switch to our original problem, focusing on two settings that differ for the incentives they allow for. Incentive constraints ensure that colluders do not leave the agency, and they can be enforced by implementing monetary transfers between the agency and the advertisers. In particular, we study the arbitrary transfers setting, where any kind of monetary transfer to and from the advertisers is allowed, and the more realistic limited liability setting, in which no advertiser can be paid by the agency. In the former, we cast the problem as a WUP instance and solve it by our graph-based algorithm, while, in the latter, we formulate it as a linear program with exponentially-many variables efficiently solvable by applying the ellipsoid algorithm to its dual. This requires to solve a suitable separation problem in polynomial time, which can be done by reducing it to a WUP instance.

We study online learning problems in which a decision maker wants to maximize their expected reward without violating a finite set of $m$ resource constraints. By casting the learning process over a suitably defined space of strategy mixtures, we recover strong duality on a Lagrangian relaxation of the underlying optimization problem, even for general settings with non-convex reward and resource-consumption functions. Then, we provide the first best-of-many-worlds type framework for this setting, with no-regret guarantees under stochastic, adversarial, and non-stationary inputs. Our framework yields the same regret guarantees of prior work in the stochastic case. On the other hand, when budgets grow at least linearly in the time horizon, it allows us to provide a constant competitive ratio in the adversarial case, which improves over the best known upper bound bound of $O(\log m \log T)$. Moreover, our framework allows the decision maker to handle non-convex reward and cost functions. We provide two game-theoretic applications of our framework to give further evidence of its flexibility. In doing so, we show that it can be employed to implement budget-pacing mechanisms in repeated first-price auctions.

We study hidden-action principal-agent problems in which a principal commits to an outcome-dependent payment scheme (called contract) so as to incentivize the agent to take a costly, unobservable action leading to favorable outcomes. In particular, we focus on Bayesian settings where the agent has private information. This is collectively encoded by the agent's type, which is unknown to the principal, but randomly drawn according to a finitely-supported, commonly-known probability distribution. In Bayesian principal-agent problems, the principal may be better off by committing to a menu of contracts specifying a contract for each agent's type, rather than committing to a single contract. This induces a two-stage process that resembles interactions studied in classical mechanism design: after the principal has committed to a menu, the agent first reports a type to the principal, and, then, the latter puts in place the contract in the menu that corresponds to the reported type. Thus, the principal's computational problem boils down to designing a menu of contracts that incentivizes the agent to report their true type and maximizes expected utility. Previous works showed that computing an optimal menu of contracts is APX-hard. Crucially, previous works focus on menus of deterministic contracts. Surprisingly, we show that, if one considers menus of randomized contracts defined as probability distributions over payment vectors, then an "almost-optimal" menu can be computed in polynomial time. Indeed, the problem of computing a principal-optimal menu of randomized contracts may not admit a maximum, but only a supremum. Nevertheless, we show how to design a polynomial-time algorithm that guarantees the principal with an expected utility arbitrarily close to the supremum. Besides this main result, we also close several gaps in the analysis of menus of deterministic contracts.

Bayesian persuasion studies how an informed sender should partially disclose information so as to influence the behavior of self-interested receivers. In the last years, a growing attention has been devoted to relaxing the assumption that the sender perfectly knows receiver's payoffs. The first crucial step towards such an achievement is to study settings where each receiver's payoffs depend on their unknown type, which is randomly determined by a known finite-supported probability distribution. This begets considerable computational challenges, as computing a sender-optimal signaling scheme is inapproximable up to within any constant factor. In this work, we circumvent this issue by leveraging ideas from mechanism design. In particular, we introduce a type reporting step in which the receiver is asked to report their type to the sender, after the latter has committed to a menu defining a signaling scheme for each possible receiver's type. We prove that, with a single receiver, the addition of this type reporting stage makes the sender's computational problem tractable. Then, we extend our framework to settings with multiple receivers, focusing on the case of no inter-agent externalities and binary actions. We show that it is possible to find a sender-optimal solution in polynomial-time by means of the ellipsoid method, given access to a suitable polynomial-time separation oracle. This can be implemented for supermodular and anonymous sender's utility functions. As for the case of submodular sender's utility functions, we first approximately cast the sender's problem into a linearly-constrained mathematical program whose objective function is the multi-linear extension of the sender's utility. Then, we show how to find in polynomial-time an approximate solution to the program by means of a continuous greedy algorithm. This provides a (1 -1/e)-approximation to the problem.

Most of the economic reports forecast that almost half of the worldwide market value unlocked by AI over the next decade (up to 6 trillion USD per year) will be in marketing&sales. In particular, AI will enable the optimization of more and more intricate economic settings, in which multiple different activities need to be jointly automated. This is the case of, e.g., Google Hotel Ads and Tripadvisor, where auctions are used to display ads of similar products or services together with their prices. As in classical ad auctions, the ads are ranked depending on the advertisers' bids, whereas, differently from classical settings, ads are displayed together with their prices, so as to provide a direct comparison among them. This dramatically affects users' behavior, as well as the properties of ad auctions. We show that, in such settings, social welfare maximization can be achieved by means of a direct-revelation mechanism that jointly optimizes, in polynomial time, the ads allocation and the advertisers' prices to be displayed with them. However, in practice it is unlikely that advertisers allow the mechanism to choose prices on their behalf. Indeed, in commonly-adopted mechanisms, ads allocation and price optimization are decoupled, so that the advertisers optimize prices and bids, while the mechanism does so for the allocation, once prices and bids are given. We investigate how this decoupling affects the efficiency of mechanisms. In particular, we study the Price of Anarchy (PoA) and the Price of Stability (PoS) of indirect-revelation mechanisms with both VCG and GSP payments, showing that the PoS for the revenue may be unbounded even with two slots, and the PoA for the social welfare may be as large as the number of slots. Nevertheless, we show that, under some assumptions, simple modifications to the indirect-revelation mechanism with VCG payments achieve a PoS of 1 for the revenue.

We study single-item single-unit Bayesian posted price auctions, where buyers arrive sequentially and their valuations for the item being sold depend on a random, unknown state of nature. The seller has complete knowledge of the actual state and can send signals to the buyers so as to disclose information about it. For instance, the state of nature may reflect the condition and/or some particular features of the item, which are known to the seller only. The problem faced by the seller is about how to partially disclose information about the state so as to maximize revenue. Unlike classical signaling problems, in this setting, the seller must also correlate the signals being sent to the buyers with some price proposals for them. This introduces additional challenges compared to standard settings. We consider two cases: the one where the seller can only send signals publicly visible to all buyers, and the case in which the seller can privately send a different signal to each buyer. As a first step, we prove that, in both settings, the problem of maximizing the seller's revenue does not admit an FPTAS unless P=NP, even for basic instances with a single buyer. As a result, in the rest of the paper, we focus on designing PTASs. In order to do so, we first introduce a unifying framework encompassing both public and private signaling, whose core result is a decomposition lemma that allows focusing on a finite set of possible buyers' posteriors. This forms the basis on which our PTASs are developed. In particular, in the public signaling setting, our PTAS employs some ad hoc techniques based on linear programming, while our PTAS for the private setting relies on the ellipsoid method to solve an exponentially-sized LP in polynomial time. In the latter case, we need a custom approximate separation oracle, which we implement with a dynamic programming approach.

We study signaling in Bayesian ad auctions, in which bidders' valuations depend on a random, unknown state of nature. The auction mechanism has complete knowledge of the actual state of nature, and it can send signals to bidders so as to disclose information about the state and increase revenue. For instance, a state may collectively encode some features of the user that are known to the mechanism only, since the latter has access to data sources unaccessible to the bidders. We study the problem of computing how the mechanism should send signals to bidders in order to maximize revenue. While this problem has already been addressed in the easier setting of second-price auctions, to the best of our knowledge, our work is the first to explore ad auctions with more than one slot. In this paper, we focus on public signaling and VCG mechanisms, under which bidders truthfully report their valuations. We start with a negative result, showing that, in general, the problem does not admit a PTAS unless P = NP, even when bidders' valuations are known to the mechanism. The rest of the paper is devoted to settings in which such negative result can be circumvented. First, we prove that, with known valuations, the problem can indeed be solved in polynomial time when either the number of states d or the number of slots m is fixed. Moreover, in the same setting, we provide an FPTAS for the case in which bidders are single minded, but d and m can be arbitrary. Then, we switch to the random valuations setting, in which these are randomly drawn according to some probability distribution. In this case, we show that the problem admits an FPTAS, a PTAS, and a QPTAS, when, respectively, d is fixed, m is fixed, and bidders' valuations are bounded away from zero.

In online marketing, the advertisers' goal is usually a tradeoff between achieving high volumes and high profitability. The companies' business units customarily address this tradeoff by maximizing the volumes while guaranteeing a lower bound to the Return On Investment (ROI). This paper investigates combinatorial bandit algorithms for the bid optimization of advertising campaigns subject to uncertain budget and ROI constraints. We study the nature of both the optimization and learning problems. In particular, when focusing on the optimization problem without uncertainty, we show that it is inapproximable within any factor unless P=NP, and we provide a pseudo-polynomial-time algorithm that achieves an optimal solution. When considering uncertainty, we prove that no online learning algorithm can violate the (ROI or budget) constraints during the learning process a sublinear number of times while guaranteeing a sublinear pseudo-regret. Thus, we provide an algorithm, namely GCB, guaranteeing sublinear regret at the cost of a potentially linear number of constraints violations. We also design its safe version, namely GCB_{safe}, guaranteeing w.h.p. a constant upper bound on the number of constraints violations at the cost of a linear pseudo-regret. More interestingly, we provide an algorithm, namely GCB_{safe}(\psi,\phi), guaranteeing both sublinear pseudo-regret and safety w.h.p. at the cost of accepting tolerances \psi and \phi in the satisfaction of the ROI and budget constraints, respectively. This algorithm actually mitigates the risks due to the constraints violations without precluding the convergence to the optimal solution. Finally, we experimentally compare our algorithms in terms of pseudo-regret/constraint-violation tradeoff in settings generated from real-world data, showing the importance of adopting safety constraints in practice and the effectiveness of our algorithms.

Bayesian persuasion studies how an informed sender should partially disclose information to influence the behavior of a self-interested receiver. Classical models make the stringent assumption that the sender knows the receiver's utility. This can be relaxed by considering an online learning framework in which the sender repeatedly faces a receiver of an unknown, adversarially selected type. We study, for the first time, an online Bayesian persuasion setting with multiple receivers. We focus on the case with no externalities and binary actions, as customary in offline models. Our goal is to design no-regret algorithms for the sender with polynomial per-iteration running time. First, we prove a negative result: for any $0 < \alpha \leq 1$, there is no polynomial-time no-$\alpha$-regret algorithm when the sender's utility function is supermodular or anonymous. Then, we focus on the case of submodular sender's utility functions and we show that, in this case, it is possible to design a polynomial-time no-$(1 - \frac{1}{e})$-regret algorithm. To do so, we introduce a general online gradient descent scheme to handle online learning problems with a finite number of possible loss functions. This requires the existence of an approximate projection oracle. We show that, in our setting, there exists one such projection oracle which can be implemented in polynomial time.

We study principal-agent problems in which a principal commits to an outcome-dependent payment scheme (a.k.a. contract) so as to induce an agent to take a costly, unobservable action. We relax the assumption that the principal perfectly knows the agent by considering a Bayesian setting where the agent's type is unknown and randomly selected according to a given probability distribution, which is known to the principal. Each agent's type is characterized by her own action costs and action-outcome distributions. In the literature on non-Bayesian principal-agent problems, considerable attention has been devoted to linear contracts, which are simple, pure-commission payment schemes that still provide nice approximation guarantees with respect to principal-optimal (possibly non-linear) contracts. While in non-Bayesian settings an optimal contract can be computed efficiently, this is no longer the case for our Bayesian principal-agent problems. This further motivates our focus on linear contracts, which can be optimized efficiently given their single-parameter nature. Our goal is to analyze the properties of linear contracts in Bayesian settings, in terms of approximation guarantees with respect to optimal contracts and general tractable contracts (i.e., efficiently-computable ones). First, we study the approximation guarantees of linear contracts with respect to optimal ones, showing that the former suffer from a multiplicative loss linear in the number of agent's types. Nevertheless, we prove that linear contracts can still provide a constant multiplicative approximation $\rho$ of the optimal principal's expected utility, though at the expense of an exponentially-small additive loss $2^{-\Omega(\rho)}$. Then, we switch to tractable contracts, showing that, surprisingly, linear contracts perform well among them.

We focus on the scenario in which an agent can exploit his information advantage to manipulate the outcome of an election. In particular, we study district-based elections with two candidates, in which the winner of the election is the candidate that wins in the majority of the districts. District-based elections are adopted worldwide (e.g., UK and USA) and are a natural extension of widely studied voting mechanisms (e.g., k-voting and plurality voting). We resort to the Bayesian persuasion framework, where the manipulator (sender) strategically discloses information to the voters (receivers) that update their beliefs rationally. We study both private signaling, in which the sender can use a private communication channel per receiver, and public signaling, in which the sender can use a single communication channel for all the receivers. Furthermore, for the first time, we introduce semi-public signaling in which the sender can use a single communication channel per district. We show that there is a sharp distinction between private and (semi-)public signaling. In particular, optimal private signaling schemes can provide an arbitrarily better probability of victory than (semi-)public ones and can be computed efficiently, while optimal (semi-)public signaling schemes cannot be approximated to within any factor in polynomial time unless P=NP. However, we show that reasonable relaxations allow the design of multi-criteria PTASs for optimal (semi-)public signaling schemes. In doing so, we introduce a novel property, namely comparative stability, and we design a bi-criteria PTAS for public signaling in general Bayesian persuasion problems beyond elections when the sender's utility function is state-dependent.

Network congestion games are a well-understood model of multi-agent strategic interactions. Despite their ubiquitous applications, it is not clear whether it is possible to design information structures to ameliorate the overall experience of the network users. We focus on Bayesian games with atomic players, where network vagaries are modeled via a (random) state of nature which determines the costs incurred by the players. A third-party entity---the sender---can observe the realized state of the network and exploit this additional information to send a signal to each player. A natural question is the following: is it possible for an informed sender to reduce the overall social cost via the strategic provision of information to players who update their beliefs rationally? The paper focuses on the problem of computing optimal ex ante persuasive signaling schemes, showing that symmetry is a crucial property for its solution. Indeed, we show that an optimal ex ante persuasive signaling scheme can be computed in polynomial time when players are symmetric and have affine cost functions. Moreover, the problem becomes NP-hard when players are asymmetric, even in non-Bayesian settings.

Persuasion studies how an informed principal may influence the behavior of agents by the strategic provision of payoff-relevant information. We focus on the fundamental multi-receiver model by Arieli and Babichenko (2019), in which there are no inter-agent externalities. Unlike prior works on this problem, we study the public persuasion problem in the general setting with: (i) arbitrary state spaces; (ii) arbitrary action spaces; (iii) arbitrary sender's utility functions. We fully characterize the computational complexity of computing a bi-criteria approximation of an optimal public signaling scheme. In particular, we show, in a voting setting of independent interest, that solving this problem requires at least a quasi-polynomial number of steps even in settings with a binary action space, assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis. In doing so, we prove that a relaxed version of the Maximum Feasible Subsystem of Linear Inequalities problem requires at least quasi-polynomial time to be solved. Finally, we close the gap by providing a quasi-polynomial time bi-criteria approximation algorithm for arbitrary public persuasion problems that, in specific settings, yields a QPTAS.

We focus on the election manipulation problem through social influence, where a manipulator exploits a social network to make her most preferred candidate win an election. Influence is due to information in favor of and/or against one or multiple candidates, sent by seeds and spreading through the network according to the independent cascade model. We provide a comprehensive study of the election control problem, investigating two forms of manipulations: seeding to buy influencers given a social network, and removing or adding edges in the social network given the seeds and the information sent. In particular, we study a wide range of cases distinguishing for the number of candidates or the kind of information spread over the network. Our main result is positive for democracy, and it shows that the election manipulation problem is not affordable in the worst-case except for trivial classes of instances, even when one accepts to approximate the margin of victory. In the case of seeding, we also show that the manipulation is hard even if the graph is a line and that a large class of algorithms, including most of the approaches recently adopted for social-influence problems, fail to compute a bounded approximation even on elementary networks, as undirected graphs with every node having a degree at most two or directed trees. In the case of edge removal or addition, our hardness results also apply to the basic case of social influence maximization/minimization. In contrast, the hardness of election manipulation holds even when the manipulator has an unlimited budget, being allowed to remove or add an arbitrary number of edges., Comment: arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1902.03779