Multi-Level Two-Sided Rating Protocol Design for Service Exchange Contest Dilemma in Crowdsensing

Strategic users in a service exchange application of crowdsensing are apt to exhibit malicious behaviors such as greed, free-ride, and attack, resulting in the phenomenon that no user is willing to serve others and low social utility is obtained in myopic equilibrium, which is considered as a service exchange contest dilemma. To address this issue, we propose a game-theoretic framework of multi-level two-sided rating protocol using all-pay contests to balance service request and service provision between users, in which a user is tagged with a multi-level rating to represent her social status, and she is encouraged to take the initiative to be a server and provide high-quality services to increase her rating. The two-sided rating update rule updates the ratings of both service requesters and service providers, and thus no one can always get services without providing services. By quantifying necessary and sufficient conditions for a sustainable multi-level two-sided rating protocol, we formulate the problem of selecting the optimal design parameters to maximize the social utility among all sustainable multi-level two-sided rating protocols, and design a low-complexity algorithm to select optimal design parameters via a two-stage procedure in an alternate manner. Finally, the extensive evaluation results demonstrate how intrinsic parameters impact on recommended strategies, design parameters, as well as the performance gain of the proposed rating protocol.

[1]  Mihaela van der Schaar,et al.  Socially-Optimal Design of Service Exchange Platforms with Imperfect Monitoring , 2015, ACM Trans. Economics and Comput..

[2]  Michihiro Kandori Social Norms and Community Enforcement , 1992 .

[3]  Jiming Chen,et al.  An Exchange Market Approach to Mobile Crowdsensing: Pricing, Task Allocation, and Walrasian Equilibrium , 2017, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[4]  Miao Pan,et al.  Incentive Mechanism for Mobile Crowdsourcing Using an Optimized Tournament Model , 2017, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[5]  Guojun Wang,et al.  Detection of hidden data attacks combined fog computing and trust evaluation method in sensor‐cloud system , 2018, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[6]  Kang G. Shin,et al.  Thwarting Intelligent Malicious Behaviors in Cooperative Spectrum Sensing , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[7]  Anfeng Liu,et al.  A risk defense method based on microscopic state prediction with partial information observations in social networks , 2019, J. Parallel Distributed Comput..

[8]  Wei Liu,et al.  A Queuing Delay Utilization Scheme for On-Path Service Aggregation in Services-Oriented Computing Networks , 2019, IEEE Access.

[9]  John C. S. Lui,et al.  Incentive Mechanism and Rating System Design for Crowdsourcing Systems: Analysis, Tradeoffs and Inference , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Services Computing.

[10]  Minming Li,et al.  Incentive Mechanism Design to Meet Task Criteria in Crowdsourcing: How to Determine Your Budget , 2017, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[11]  Xiong Li,et al.  A Collaboration Platform for Effective Task and Data Reporter Selection in Crowdsourcing Network , 2019, IEEE Access.

[12]  Mihaela van der Schaar,et al.  Rating Protocols in Online Communities , 2014, TEAC.

[13]  Haiying Shen,et al.  Game-Theoretic Analysis of Cooperation Incentive Strategies in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[14]  Jian Tang,et al.  Keep Your Promise: Mechanism Design Against Free-Riding and False-Reporting in Crowdsourcing , 2015, IEEE Internet of Things Journal.

[15]  Hwee Pink Tan,et al.  Incentive Mechanism Design for Crowdsourcing , 2016, ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol..

[16]  Lin Chen,et al.  Auditing a Cloud Provider’s Compliance With Data Backup Requirements: A Game Theoretical Analysis , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[17]  Mihaela van der Schaar,et al.  Peer-to-Peer Multimedia Sharing based on Social Norms , 2011, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[18]  Xi Fang,et al.  Incentive Mechanisms for Crowdsensing: Crowdsourcing With Smartphones , 2016, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[19]  Husnu S. Narman,et al.  A Survey of Mobile Crowdsensing Techniques , 2018, ACM Trans. Cyber Phys. Syst..

[20]  Qian Wu,et al.  Designing Socially-Optimal Rating Protocols for Crowdsourcing Contest Dilemma , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[21]  Fan Wu,et al.  Sustainable Incentives for Mobile Crowdsensing: Auctions, Lotteries, and Trust and Reputation Systems , 2017, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[22]  Weijia Jia,et al.  Coupling resource management based on fog computing in smart city systems , 2019, J. Netw. Comput. Appl..

[23]  Zhu Han,et al.  Resource Management in Cloud Networking Using Economic Analysis and Pricing Models: A Survey , 2017, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[24]  Hwee Pink Tan,et al.  Incentive Mechanism Design for Heterogeneous Crowdsourcing Using All-Pay Contests , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[25]  Arun Kumar Sangaiah,et al.  Energy-Efficient and Trustworthy Data Collection Protocol Based on Mobile Fog Computing in Internet of Things , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[26]  Xi Zheng,et al.  Crowdsourcing Mechanism for Trust Evaluation in CPCS Based on Intelligent Mobile Edge Computing , 2019, ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol..

[27]  Kenli Li,et al.  Game-Theoretic Design of Optimal Two-Sided Rating Protocols for Service Exchange Dilemma in Crowdsourcing , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security.

[28]  Vincent W. S. Wong,et al.  Quality of Sensing Aware Budget Feasible Mechanism for Mobile Crowdsensing , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.