The price of anarchy is independent of the network topology

We study the degradation in network performance caused by the selfish behavior of noncooperative network users. We consider a directed network in which each edge possesses a latency function describing the common latency incurred by all traffic on the edge as a function of the edge congestion. Given a rate of traffic between each pair of nodes in the network, we aspire toward an assignment of traffic to paths in which the sum of all travel times (the total latency) is minimized; however, in many settings network users are free to route their traffic in a selfish manner, without regard to the total latency. We therefore assume that each network user routes its traffic on the minimum-latency path available to it, given the network congestion caused by the other users. In general such a "selfishly motivated" assignment of traffic to paths (a Nash equilibrium) will not minimize the total latency; hence, selfish behavior carries the cost of decreased network performance. We quantify this degradation in network performance via the price of anarchy, defined as the worst possible ratio between the total latency of a Nash equilibrium and of a minimum-latency routing of the traffic.In this paper, we show that the underlying network topology plays no role in the determination of the price of anarchy. Specifically, we show that under weak hypotheses on the class of allowable edge latency functions, the worst-case ratio between the total latency of a Nash equilibrium and of a minimum-latency routing for any multicommodity flow network is achieved by a single-commodity instance on a set of parallel links. In the special case where the class of allowable latency functions includes all of the constant functions, we prove that a network with only two parallel links suffices to achieve the worst-possible ratio. Informally, these results imply that the inefficiency inherent in a flow at Nash equilibrium stems from the inability of selfish users to discern which of two competing routes is superior and not from the topological complexity arising from the diverse intersections of many paths belonging to different commoditie.Our proof techniques also give powerful methods for computing the price of anarchy with respect to an arbitrary class of latency functions. We apply these methods to function classes that have been well studied in the literature (such as degree-bounded polynomials and functions of the form $\ell(x) = (u—x)—1} that are used to model edges with capacity u), thereby achieving the first tight analyses of the price of anarchy for significant classes of latency functions outside the class of linear functions.

[1]  A. C. Pigou Economics of welfare , 1920 .

[2]  小泉 信三 社会政策の原理 : Pigou, The economics of welfareを読む , 1923 .

[3]  J. G. Wardrop,et al.  Some Theoretical Aspects of Road Traffic Research , 1952 .

[4]  C. B. Mcguire,et al.  Studies in the Economics of Transportation , 1958 .

[5]  W. Rudin Principles of mathematical analysis , 1964 .

[6]  Stella C. Dafermos,et al.  Traffic assignment problem for a general network , 1969 .

[7]  I. Adan,et al.  QUEUEING THEORY , 1978 .

[8]  S. Karlin,et al.  A second course in stochastic processes , 1981 .

[9]  Robert E. Tarjan,et al.  Data structures and network algorithms , 1983, CBMS-NSF regional conference series in applied mathematics.

[10]  Pradeep Dubey,et al.  Inefficiency of Nash Equilibria , 1986, Math. Oper. Res..

[11]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Data Networks , 1986 .

[12]  P. Gács,et al.  Algorithms , 1992 .

[13]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Competitive routing in multiuser communication networks , 1993, TNET.

[14]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Competitive routing in multi-user communication networks , 1993, IEEE INFOCOM '93 The Conference on Computer Communications, Proceedings.

[15]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Avoiding the Braess paradox in non-cooperative networks , 1999, Journal of Applied Probability.

[16]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Virtual path bandwidth allocation in multiuser networks , 1997, TNET.

[17]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Capacity allocation under noncooperative routing , 1997, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[18]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Worst-case equilibria , 1999 .

[19]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  How bad is selfish routing? , 2000, Proceedings 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[20]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Algorithms, games, and the internet , 2001, STOC '01.

[21]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Atomic Resource Sharing in Noncooperative Networks , 2001, Telecommun. Syst..

[22]  Paul G. Spirakis,et al.  The price of selfish routing , 2001, STOC '01.

[23]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Designing networks for selfish users is hard , 2001, Proceedings 2001 IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing.

[24]  Berthold Vöcking,et al.  Selfish traffic allocation for server farms , 2002, STOC '02.

[25]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Selfish Routing , 2002 .

[26]  Berthold Vöcking,et al.  Tight bounds for worst-case equilibria , 2002, SODA '02.

[27]  Eric J. Friedman,et al.  A Generic Analysis of Selfish Routing , 2002 .

[28]  S. Fischer Selfish Routing , 2002 .

[29]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  How bad is selfish routing? , 2002, JACM.

[30]  Adrian Vetta,et al.  Nash equilibria in competitive societies, with applications to facility location, traffic routing and auctions , 2002, The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings..

[31]  Andreas S. Schulz,et al.  On the performance of user equilibria in traffic networks , 2003, SODA '03.

[32]  Ciro D'Apice,et al.  Queueing Theory , 2003, Operations Research.

[33]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Bounding the inefficiency of equilibria in nonatomic congestion games , 2004, Games Econ. Behav..

[34]  Tim Roughgarden The maximum latency of selfish routing , 2004, SODA '04.

[35]  Tim Roughgarden Stackelberg Scheduling Strategies , 2004, SIAM J. Comput..