The Weighted Proportional Allocation Mechanism

We consider a weighted proportional allocation of resources that allows providers to discriminate usage of resources by users. This framework is a generalization of well-known proportional allocation accommodating allocation of resources proportional to weighted bids or proportional to submitted bids but with weighted payments. We study a competition game where everyone is selfish: providers choose discrimination weights aiming at maximizing their individual revenues while users choose their bids aiming at maximizing their individual payoffs. We analyze revenue and social welfare of this game. We find that the revenue is lower bounded by k/(k+1) times the revenue under standard price discrimination scheme, where a set of k users is excluded. For users with linear utility functions, we find that the social welfare is at least 1/(1+ 2/ √ 3) of the maximum social welfare (approx. 46%) and that this bound is tight. We extend the efficiency result to a broad class of utility functions and to multiple competing providers. We also describe an algorithm used by the provider to adjust the user discrimination weights without a prior knowledge of user utility functions and establish convergence to equilibrium points of our game. Our results show that, in many cases, weighted proportional sharing achieves competitive revenue and social welfare, despite the fact that everyone is selfish. The mechanism allows for resource constraints described by general polyhedrons, thus accommodating a variety of resources, including bandwidth of communication networks, systems of computing resources, and sponsored search ad slots.

[1]  R. Srikant,et al.  Economics of Network Pricing With Multiple ISPs , 2006, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[2]  Frank Kelly,et al.  Charging and rate control for elastic traffic , 1997, Eur. Trans. Telecommun..

[3]  Frank Kelly,et al.  Rate control for communication networks: shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability , 1998, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[4]  Michal Feldman,et al.  A price-anticipating resource allocation mechanism for distributed shared clusters , 2005, EC '05.

[5]  Vishal Misra,et al.  On Resource Management for Cloud Users: A Generalized Kelly Mechanism Approach , 2010 .

[6]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Algorithmic Game Theory , 2007 .

[7]  Jon Feldman,et al.  A Truthful Mechanism for Offline Ad Slot Scheduling , 2008, SAGT.

[8]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Efficiency loss in a network resource allocation game: the case of elastic supply , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[9]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: the multiple node case , 1994, TNET.

[10]  Éva Tardos,et al.  A network pricing game for selfish traffic , 2005, PODC '05.

[11]  B. Hajek,et al.  Strategic Buyers in a Sum Bid Game for Flat Networks , 2004 .

[12]  Irfan Ahmad,et al.  PARDA: Proportional Allocation of Resources for Distributed Storage Access , 2009, FAST.

[13]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm , 1989, SIGCOMM '89.

[14]  J. Tirole The Theory of Industrial Organization , 1988 .

[15]  Sean P. Meyn,et al.  A Control Theorist's Perspective on Dynamic Competitive Equilibria in Electricity Markets , 2011 .

[16]  Ramesh Johari,et al.  Efficiency loss in market mechanisms for resource allocation , 2004 .

[17]  Jean C. Walrand,et al.  Fair end-to-end window-based congestion control , 2000, TNET.

[18]  B. Engquist,et al.  Mathematics Unlimited: 2001 and Beyond , 2001 .

[19]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  Understanding TCP Vegas: a duality model , 2001, JACM.

[20]  Jean C. Walrand,et al.  Pricing and revenue sharing strategies for Internet service providers , 2005, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[21]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Approximately maximizing efficiency and revenue in polyhedral environments , 2007, EC '07.

[22]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Multi-unit Auctions with Budget Limits , 2008, 2008 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[23]  Yin Zhang,et al.  Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming , 2004, SIGCOMM 2004.

[24]  P. Krugman Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade , 1980 .

[25]  Laurent Massoulié,et al.  Farsighted users harness network time-diversity , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[26]  P. Michor Mathematics unlimited-2001 and Beyond , 2005 .

[27]  R. Srikant,et al.  The Price of Simplicity , 2007, 2007 Conference Record of the Forty-First Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers.

[28]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks-the multiple node case , 1993, IEEE INFOCOM '93 The Conference on Computer Communications, Proceedings.

[29]  Steven H. Low,et al.  Understanding TCP Vegas: a duality model , 2002 .

[30]  Richard J. Gibbens,et al.  On packet marking at priority queues , 2002, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[31]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: the single-node case , 1993, TNET.