The celebrated Myerson--Satterthwaite theorem shows that in bilateral trade, no mechanism can be simultaneously fully efficient, Bayesian incentive compatible (BIC), and budget balanced (BB). This naturally raises the question of how closely the gains from trade (GFT) achievable by a BIC and BB mechanism can approximate the first-best (fully efficient) benchmark. The optimal BIC and BB mechanism is typically complex and highly distribution-dependent, making it difficult to characterize directly. Consequently, much of the literature analyzes simpler mechanisms such as the Random-Offerer (RO) mechanism and establishes constant-factor guarantees relative to the first-best GFT. An important open question concerns the worst-case performance of the RO mechanism relative to first-best (FB) efficiency. While it was originally hypothesized that the approximation ratio $\frac{\text{GFT}_{\text{FB}}}{\text{GFT}_{\text{RO}}}$ is bounded by $2$, recent work provided counterexamples to this conjecture: Cai et al. proved that the ratio can be strictly larger than $2$, and Babaioff et al. exhibited an explicit example with ratio approximately $2.02$. In this work, we employ AlphaEvolve, an AI-guided evolutionary search framework, to explore the space of value distributions. We identify a new worst-case instance that yields an improved lower bound of $\frac{\text{GFT}_{\text{FB}}}{\text{GFT}_{\text{RO}}} \ge \textbf{2.0749}$. This establishes a new lower bound on the worst-case performance of the Random-Offerer mechanism, demonstrating a wider efficiency gap than previously known.
Kshipra Bhawalkar, Jeff Dean, Christopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta, Neel Patel
We envision a marketplace where diverse entities offer specialized "modules" through APIs, allowing users to compose the outputs of these modules for complex tasks within a given budget. This paper studies the market design problem in such an ecosystem, where module owners strategically set prices for their APIs (to maximize their profit) and a central platform orchestrates the aggregation of module outputs at query-time. One can also think about this as a first-price procurement auction with budgets. The first observation is that if the platform's algorithm is to find the optimal set of modules then this could result in a poor outcome, in the sense that there are price equilibria which provide arbitrarily low value for the user. We show that under a suitable version of the "bang-per-buck" algorithm for the knapsack problem, an $\varepsilon$-approximate equilibrium always exists, for any arbitrary $\varepsilon > 0$. Further, our first main result shows that with this algorithm any such equilibrium provides a constant approximation to the optimal value that the buyer could get under various constraints including (i) a budget constraint and (ii) a budget and a matroid constraint. Finally, we demonstrate that these efficient equilibria can be learned through decentralized price adjustments by module owners using no-regret learning algorithms.