Main Article Content
Additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games have received considerable attention in the literature. They are coalition formation games among selfish agents based on their mutual preferences. Most of the work in the literature characterizes the existence and structure of stable outcomes (i.e., partitions into coalitions) assuming that preferences are given. However, there is little discussion of this assumption. In fact, agents receive different utilities if they belong to different coalitions, and thus it is natural for them to declare their preferences strategically in order to maximize their benefit. In this paper we consider strategyproof mechanisms for additively separable hedonic games and fractional hedonic games, that is, partitioning methods without payments such that utility maximizing agents have no incentive to lie about their true preferences. We focus on social welfare maximization and provide several lower and upper bounds on the performance achievable by strategyproof mechanisms for general and specific additive functions. In most of the cases we provide tight or asymptotically tight results. All our mechanisms are simple and can be run in polynomial time. Moreover, all the lower bounds are unconditional, that is, they do not rely on any computational complexity assumptions.