Off-topic for aiqbench
This story was gathered from a source we follow but falls outside AI and quantum coverage, so there is no aiqbench take for it.
Improving the Bounds on Approximating Weighted Maximin Share for Chores
arXiv:2610.15520v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We investigate the problem of allocating indivisible chores among agents with arbitrary positive weights and additive nonnegative cost functions. An allocation is said to be $\alpha$-weighted-maximin-share (WMMS) fair if the cost incurred by each agent is at most $\alpha$ times her weighted maximin share. We establish that every instance admits a $4.124234528$-WMMS allocation. Moreover, for instances in which all weights and costs are rational numbers represented in binary, we give an algorithm that computes a $4.12424$-WMMS allocation in time polynomial in the number of agents, the number of chores, and the total binary encoding length of the input. Complementing these upper bounds, we construct a family of instances with strictly positive, identically ordered costs for which the optimal WMMS approximation factors converge to $e$. Together, our results substantially narrow the previously best-known gap of $[2,12]$ established by Li et al.~\cite{LWX26} to $[e,4.12424]$.
Abstract:We investigate the problem of allocating indivisible chores among agents with arbitrary positive weights and additive nonnegative cost functions. An allocation is said to be $\alpha$-weighted-maximin-share (WMMS) fair if the cost incurred by each agent is at most $\alpha$ times her weighted maximin share. We establish that every instance admits a $4.124234528$-WMMS allocation. Moreover, for instances in which all weights and costs are rational numbers represented in binary, we give an algorithm that computes a $4.12424$-WMMS allocation in time polynomial in the number of agents, the number of chores, and the total binary encoding length of the input. Complementing these upper bounds, we construct a family of instances with strictly positive, identically ordered costs for which the optimal WMMS approximation factors converge to $e$. Together, our results substantially narrow the previously best-known gap of $[2,12]$ established by Li et al.~\cite{LWX26} to $[e,4.12424]$.
Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.15520 [cs.GT]
(or arXiv:2610.15520v1 [cs.GT] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.15520 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 242 words
Related coverage

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · Aug 15, 2026

Researchers Bound Extended Source Imaging Error by 74%
Quantum Zeitgeist · Sep 30, 2026

Deploying Qwen3.8-2.4T-A95B on Amazon SageMaker HyperPod with vLLM
AWS · Sep 9, 2026

Accelerate LLM model loading and increase context windows with GPUDirect on Amazon FSx for Lustre and TurboQuant
AWS · Jun 1, 2026