Local Two-Stage Myopic Dynamics for Network Formation Games

Similar documents
Network Formation and Routing by Strategic Agents using Local Contracts

ECO 199 B GAMES OF STRATEGY Spring Term 2004 PROBLEM SET 4 B DRAFT ANSWER KEY

1. Write the number of the left-hand item next to the item on the right that corresponds to it.

Bargaining Solutions in a Social Network

Decentralized Utility-based Sensor Network Design

Computational Game Theory and Clustering

Individual security and network design

On Unstructured File Sharing Networks

Social Distance Games

6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 1: Introduction

6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 2: Strategic Form Games

THIRD-GENERATION (3G) wide-area wireless networks

Topological Properties

6.207/14.15: Networks Lecture 15: Repeated Games and Cooperation

Multihoming and Multi-path Routing. CS 7260 Nick Feamster January

The Max-Distance Network Creation Game on General Host Graphs

Capacity Management and Equilibrium for Proportional QoS

Social Networks and Stable Matchings in the Job Market

Optimal Gateway Selection in Multi-domain Wireless Networks: A Potential Game Perspective

Tight Bounds for Selfish and Greedy Load Balancing

Network Security Validation Using Game Theory

Internet Sustainability and Network Marketing Safety

The Shapley Value: Its Use and Implications on Internet Economics

Pareto Efficiency and Approximate Pareto Efficiency in Routing and Load Balancing Games

Routing and Peering in a Competitive Internet

A Graph-Theoretic Network Security Game

Pareto Set, Fairness, and Nash Equilibrium: A Case Study on Load Balancing

Lecture 2.1 : The Distributed Bellman-Ford Algorithm. Lecture 2.2 : The Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) protocol

Network Flow I. Lecture Overview The Network Flow Problem

NETWORK DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT WITH STRATEGIC AGENTS

Multicast Group Management for Interactive Distributed Applications

Security decision-making among interdependent organizations

Working Paper Series ISSN Working Paper No Stability for Coalition Formation Games. Salvador Barberà and Anke Gerber

Numerical Analysis Lecture Notes

The Internet and the Public Switched Telephone Network Disparities, Differences, and Distinctions

Extremal Wiener Index of Trees with All Degrees Odd

Local-Effect Games. Kevin Leyton-Brown and Moshe Tennenholtz. Abstract. 1 Introduction. 2 Local-Effect Games

Compact Representations and Approximations for Compuation in Games

Load Balancing in Periodic Wireless Sensor Networks for Lifetime Maximisation

Product Differentiation In homogeneous goods markets, price competition leads to perfectly competitive outcome, even with two firms Price competition

A Numerical Study on the Wiretap Network with a Simple Network Topology

Online Appendix to Stochastic Imitative Game Dynamics with Committed Agents

Interconnecting Eyeballs to Content: A Shapley Value Perspective on ISP Peering and Settlement

Privacy-Constrained Network Formation

Computing the Electricity Market Equilibrium: Uses of market equilibrium models

Introduction to LAN/WAN. Network Layer

On the Existence of Optimal Taxes for Network Congestion Games with Heterogeneous Users

Math 55: Discrete Mathematics

Homework Assignment #1: Answer Key

Network (Tree) Topology Inference Based on Prüfer Sequence

Distributed Computing over Communication Networks: Maximal Independent Set

20 Selfish Load Balancing

A Graph-Theoretic Network Security Game. Marios Mavronicolas, Vicky G. Papadopoulou, Anna Philippou and Paul G. Spirakis

BRAESS-LIKE PARADOXES FOR NON-COOPERATIVE DYNAMIC LOAD BALANCING IN DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMS

Games Manipulators Play

Distributed Computing over Communication Networks: Topology. (with an excursion to P2P)

Strong and Weak Ties

Diversity Coloring for Distributed Data Storage in Networks 1

DD2491 p Load balancing BGP. Johan Nicklasson KTHNOC/NADA

Performance of networks containing both MaxNet and SumNet links

Lecture 23: Interconnection Networks. Topics: communication latency, centralized and decentralized switches (Appendix E)

Do you trust that the price is right? Marketplace Implications? Current IaaS Practice: Fixed Pricing

Graph Theory Origin and Seven Bridges of Königsberg -Rhishikesh

Routing Overlays and Virtualization. Nick Feamster CS 7260 March 7, 2007

Mediated Equilibria in Load-Balancing Games

Handout #Ch7 San Skulrattanakulchai Gustavus Adolphus College Dec 6, Chapter 7: Digraphs

Graph Theory and Complex Networks: An Introduction. Chapter 06: Network analysis. Contents. Introduction. Maarten van Steen. Version: April 28, 2014

Asking Hard Graph Questions. Paul Burkhardt. February 3, 2014

Content Distribution over IP: Developments and Challenges

Network Tomography and Internet Traffic Matrices

SPERNER S LEMMA AND BROUWER S FIXED POINT THEOREM

CSE 326, Data Structures. Sample Final Exam. Problem Max Points Score 1 14 (2x7) 2 18 (3x6) Total 92.

The Price War in Wireless Network Marketing

Graph models for the Web and the Internet. Elias Koutsoupias University of Athens and UCLA. Crete, July 2003

Misleading Stars: What Cannot Be Measured in the Internet?

Summary of Doctoral Dissertation: Voluntary Participation Games in Public Good Mechanisms: Coalitional Deviations and Efficiency

Price of Anarchy in Non-Cooperative Load Balancing

Graph Theory and Complex Networks: An Introduction. Chapter 06: Network analysis

New Economic Perspectives for Resource Allocation in Wireless Networks

Complex Networks Analysis: Clustering Methods

Exercise 4 MPLS router configuration

B4: Experience with a Globally-Deployed Software Defined WAN TO APPEAR IN SIGCOMM 13

Selfish MAC Layer Misbehavior in Wireless Networks

These axioms must hold for all vectors ū, v, and w in V and all scalars c and d.

On the Traffic Capacity of Cellular Data Networks. 1 Introduction. T. Bonald 1,2, A. Proutière 1,2

Energy Optimal Routing Protocol for a Wireless Data Network

Network Design with Coverage Costs

Broadcasting in Wireless Networks

Strategic planning in LTL logistics increasing the capacity utilization of trucks

Optimizing Enterprise Network Bandwidth For Security Applications. Improving Performance Using Antaira s Management Features

UCLA. Department of Economics Ph. D. Preliminary Exam Micro-Economic Theory

Network Traffic Modelling

Load Balancing and Switch Scheduling

Lecture 8: Routing I Distance-vector Algorithms. CSE 123: Computer Networks Stefan Savage

The Shapley Profit for Content, Transit and Eyeball Internet Service Providers

Social and Economic Networks: Lecture 1, Networks?

802 IEEE/ACM TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORKING, VOL. 19, NO. 3, JUNE 2011

On the effect of forwarding table size on SDN network utilization

CPET 581 E-Commerce & Business Technologies. Topics

Hacking-proofness and Stability in a Model of Information Security Networks

Transcription:

Myopic for Network Esteban 1 Ramesh 2 Shie 3 1 Institute for Computational and Mathematical Engineering Stanford University 2 Department of Management Science and Engineering Stanford University 3 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering McGill University (on leave at Technion) Myopic Distance Flow The 4 th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics (WINE 08)

Outline Myopic Distance Flow

Objectives Goal: Design intuitive dynamics that converge to good equilibria of Network Myopic Distance Flow

Objectives Goal: Design intuitive dynamics that converge to good equilibria of Network Myopic Setting: Data and transportation networks Distance Flow

Objectives Goal: Design intuitive dynamics that converge to good equilibria of Network Myopic Setting: Data and transportation networks Allocation Rules: flow based and sender based Distance Flow

Objectives Goal: Design intuitive dynamics that converge to good equilibria of Network Myopic Setting: Data and transportation networks Allocation Rules: flow based and sender based Pairwise Nash Stability Strong Stability Distance Flow

Objectives Goal: Design intuitive dynamics that converge to good equilibria of Network Myopic Setting: Data and transportation networks Allocation Rules: flow based and sender based Pairwise Nash Stability Strong Stability Distance Flow Examples: The Internet at the ISP level Mobile ad-hoc networks

Assume G connected γ(u, v; G): cost of sending one packet from u to v u v 2 v 3 v 5 = v Myopic v 1 v 4 γ(u, v; G) = 5 i=1 c v i Maintenance cost per edge of 2β > 0 Distance Flow

Assume G connected γ(u, v; G): cost of sending one packet from u to v u v 2 v 3 v 5 = v Myopic v 1 v 4 γ(u, v; G) = 5 i=1 c v i Maintenance cost per edge of 2β > 0 Cost of network G: Distance Flow Γ(G) = 2β E + u,v γ(u, v; G)

Allocation Rules Cost of edge evenly split among endpoints. For routing cost, two allocation rules: 1. Sender based allocation rule Y d 2. Flow based allocation rule Y f Cost to node u: C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + Y d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u γ(u, v; G) Myopic Distance Flow C f (u; G) = βd u (G) + Y f (u; G) = βd u (G) + c u f (u; G) f (u; G) traffic forwarded or received by u. Note: routing policy given.

Myerson Announcement Game Nodes are selfish agents. Edges result from bilateral agreements: node u announces desired neighborhood Myopic S u V \ {u} uv = e E if and only if u S v and v S u. Distance Flow

Myerson Announcement Game Nodes are selfish agents. Edges result from bilateral agreements: node u announces desired neighborhood Myopic S u V \ {u} uv = e E if and only if u S v and v S u. Network results from strategic interactions between selfish agents. Distance Flow

Deviations Considered Myopic Unilateral deviation w z u v w u v z Pairwise deviation w z u v Distance Flow Nash network: no profitable unilateral deviation

Deviations Considered Myopic Unilateral deviation w z u v w u v z Pairwise deviation w z u v Distance Flow Nash network: no profitable unilateral deviation Pairwise Nash stable network: both types of deviations

Why do we need dynamics? Let V min = {u V v, c u c v }. Assume that, for all u, c u = Θ(1). Then Theorem (Efficient Networks) For β < c min, the complete graph is the only efficient network. For β > c min only stars centered at a node u V min are efficient. Myopic Distance Flow

Why do we need dynamics? Let V min = {u V v, c u c v }. Assume that, for all u, c u = Θ(1). Then Theorem (Efficient Networks) For β < c min, the complete graph is the only efficient network. For β > c min only stars centered at a node u V min are efficient. Theorem (Pairwise Nash Stable Networks) For all β > 0, all trees are PNS when using Y f. For all β > n 2 c max, all trees are PNS when using Y d. Myopic Distance Flow

Why do we need dynamics? Let V min = {u V v, c u c v }. Assume that, for all u, c u = Θ(1). Then Theorem (Efficient Networks) For β < c min, the complete graph is the only efficient network. For β > c min only stars centered at a node u V min are efficient. Theorem (Pairwise Nash Stable Networks) For all β > 0, all trees are PNS when using Y f. For all β > n 2 c max, all trees are PNS when using Y d. Myopic Distance Flow Price of anarchy is linear in n.

Two-Stage Local Let l > 1 be given. Let G be the network topology. Select an active node u. Then u performs two consecutive deviations in a round (called stages) with nodes in his l-neighborhood: First stage: unilateral deviation Second stage: any type of deviation Myopic Distance Flow

Two-Stage Local Let l > 1 be given. Let G be the network topology. Select an active node u. Then u performs two consecutive deviations in a round (called stages) with nodes in his l-neighborhood: First stage: unilateral deviation Second stage: any type of deviation u minimizes its cost at the end of the round. All other nodes minimize their cost stage by stage. Myopic Distance Flow

Why These Two-Stage? Myopic Simple generalization of best-response dynamics; only require u to know its l-neighborhood; and Allows for links to be added and removed in one round. one step look-ahead type of dynamics Distance Flow

Why These Two-Stage? Myopic Simple generalization of best-response dynamics; only require u to know its l-neighborhood; and Allows for links to be added and removed in one round. one step look-ahead type of dynamics Allows node u to create a favorable intermediate state so that w accepts u s offer even if w s cost increases overall. Distance Flow

Why the one-step look-ahead? Intuition Here C(w; T ) < C(w; T uv + uw) and C(u; T ) > C(u; T uv + uw). Myopic T T uv v u removes uv v u u Distance w w Flow v rejects proposed bilateral deviation u T uv + uw v u proposes (u, w) to w w accepts w

Sender Allocation Rule Theorem Assume that, for all u, c u = Θ(1). Further, let β > n 2 c max and G (0) be a connected network. Then the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics: 1. have constant diameter; and 2. are pairwise Nash stable. Myopic Distance Note: constant diameter implies constant efficiency ratio Flow our dynamics select good equilibria!

Sender Allocation Rule Theorem Assume that, for all u, c u = Θ(1). Further, let β > n 2 c max and G (0) be a connected network. Then the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics: 1. have constant diameter; and 2. are pairwise Nash stable. Myopic Distance Note: constant diameter implies constant efficiency ratio Flow our dynamics select good equilibria! But, can we do better?

Homogeneous Agents Setting Preliminary Theorem Assume that, for all u, c u = 1. Further, let β > n 2 and G (0) be a connected network. Then the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics are efficient Note: for such values of β, efficient outcomes are PNS: our dynamics select efficient equilibria! Myopic Distance Flow

Homogeneous Agents Setting Preliminary Theorem Assume that, for all u, c u = 1. Further, let β > n 2 and G (0) be a connected network. Then the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics are efficient Note: for such values of β, efficient outcomes are PNS: our dynamics select efficient equilibria! Myopic Distance Flow But, what about that strong assumption on β?

Generalized Sender Based Setting In homogeneous agents setting, we can write C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u d(u, v; G). Myopic Distance Flow

Generalized Sender Based Setting In homogeneous agents setting, we can write C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u d(u, v; G). Myopic We can generalize this model further: C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u g(d(u, v; G)) Distance Flow where g is a given strictly increasing function.

Generalized Sender Based Setting In homogeneous agents setting, we can write C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u d(u, v; G). Myopic We can generalize this model further: C d (u; G) = βd u (G) + v u g(d(u, v; G)) Distance Flow where g is a given strictly increasing function. Example (Connections ) Assume g(x) = α x, then we recover Jackson and Wolinsky s connections model.

Generalized Sender Based Setting Strong Stability A network G is strongly stable if no coalition of nodes can profitably deviate from G. We still assume β sufficiently large for redundant links not to be valuable. Then, for any strictly increasing function g, all line networks are strongly stable; and all star networks are strongly stable. Myopic Distance Flow the price of anarchy and the price of stability under both strong stability and PNS are the same!

Generalized Sender Based Setting Convergence Theorem We still assume β sufficiently large for redundant links not to be valuable. For two general classes of functions g, the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics are efficient; and all fixed points are also strongly stable Myopic Distance Flow our dynamics still select efficient equilibria!

Generalized Sender Based Setting Convergence Theorem We still assume β sufficiently large for redundant links not to be valuable. For two general classes of functions g, the dynamics converge almost surely; all fixed points of the dynamics are efficient; and all fixed points are also strongly stable Myopic Distance Flow our dynamics still select efficient equilibria! Note that both g(x) = α x (connections model with α > 1) and g(x) = x (Corbo and Parkes model) satisfy both conditions for the dynamics to converge.

Important Extension max Function Assume the cost to a node u in G is C(u; G) = βd u (G) + max {d(u, v; G)}, v V and β is large enough for redundant links not to be valuable. Myopic Distance Flow

Important Extension max Function Assume the cost to a node u in G is C(u; G) = βd u (G) + max {d(u, v; G)}, v V and β is large enough for redundant links not to be valuable. The price of anarchy and the price of stability under both PNS and strong stability are identical; the dynamics converge almost surely; the limit networks are strongly stable and of diameter at most three. Myopic Distance Flow The price of anarchy of the dynamics is 3/2.

Flow Allocation Rule and Given β > 0, all trees are fixed points of our dynamics: we revise the utility model as in WINE 07 and WINE 08 we allow utility transfers through contracts Myopic Under some reasonable assumptions about the utility transfers, the dynamics converge almost surely to; 1. PNS networks (sometimes with good efficiency); and 2. to the most efficient PNS network if unique. Distance Flow our dynamics sometimes select good equilibria.

Selecting Good Networks What happens if we have several nodes of minimum routing cost? Myopic Minimum routing cost nodes Distance Flow In the limiting state, all traffic is routed by minimum routing cost nodes.

Summary of For sender based allocation rule Y d, we always select good equilibria; if homogeneous agents, we select efficient equilibria even in a generalized setting under strong stability; Myopic Distance Flow

Summary of For sender based allocation rule Y d, we always select good equilibria; if homogeneous agents, we select efficient equilibria even in a generalized setting under strong stability; but require β to be sufficiently large to discourage redundant links. Myopic Distance Flow

Summary of For sender based allocation rule Y d, we always select good equilibria; if homogeneous agents, we select efficient equilibria even in a generalized setting under strong stability; but require β to be sufficiently large to discourage redundant links. For flow based allocation rule Y f, no restriction on β > 0; we sometimes select good equilibria; Myopic Distance Flow we select the most efficient PNS network if unique;

Summary of For sender based allocation rule Y d, we always select good equilibria; if homogeneous agents, we select efficient equilibria even in a generalized setting under strong stability; but require β to be sufficiently large to discourage redundant links. For flow based allocation rule Y f, no restriction on β > 0; we sometimes select good equilibria; Myopic Distance Flow we select the most efficient PNS network if unique; but we require utility transfers between nodes.