Online Fair Division with Budget Constraints
We study an online variant of discrete fair division under generalized assignment budget constraints. Goods arrive one at a time and must be assigned irrevocably to a feasible agent or to charity, which holds all unallocated goods, while fairness is evaluated only against budget-feasible subsets of every recipient's bundle. We first show that, without additional structure, no deterministic online algorithm can guarantee any fixed approximation to feasible envy-freeness, even in highly symmetric
Record details
Published: 25 July 2026
Source: arXiv fairness query
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Agents & autonomy
Retrieved: 29 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
“Antisocial Today and Also Always”?: A Qualitative Examination of Engineering Students’ Social Considerations in Robot Design for Healthcare
Science and Engineering Ethics · 24 July 2026
Private Again: AI Agents Restore Anonymity---Foreclosing Discrimination and Its Proof
arXiv cs.CY · 28 July 2026
Learning faults in time: sequential behavioural modelling for complex fault detection in multi-robot systems
Frontiers in Robotics and AI · 29 July 2026
Parameterized Fair Resource Allocation under Diversity Constraints
arXiv fairness query · 29 July 2026
The Optimization Trilemma: Efficiency, Comfort and Fairness in Decentralized Multi-agent Coordination
arXiv cs.CY · 21 July 2026
Paying for Honesty Without Knowing the Truth: Reputation-Penalty Design for LLM Marketplace Agents
arXiv cs.AI · 30 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (25 July 2026), “Online Fair Division with Budget Constraints,” evidence record 14464, https://ethics.ai/record/14464 (originally published by arXiv fairness query).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.