On bidding algorithms for a distributed combinatorial auction

Combinatorial auctions CAs are a great way to solve complex resource allocation and coordination problems. However, CAs require a central auctioneer who receives the bids and solves the winner determination problem, an NP-hard problem. Unfortunately, a centralized auction is not a good fit for real world situations where the participants have proprietary interests that they wish to remain private or when it is difficult to establish a trusted auctioneer. The work presented here is motivated by the vision of distributed CAs; incentive compatible peer-to-peer mechanisms to solve the allocation problem, where bidders carry out the needed computation. For such a system to exist, both a protocol that distributes the computational task amongst the bidders and strategies for bidding behavior are needed. PAUSE is combinatorial auction mechanism that naturally distributes the computational load amongst the bidders, establishing the protocol or rules the participants must follow. However, it does not provide bidders with bidding strategies. This article revisits and reevaluates a set of bidding algorithms that represent different bidding strategies that bidders can use to engage in a PAUSE auction, presenting a study that analyzes them with respect to the number of goods, bids, and bidders. Results show that PAUSE, along with the aforementioned heuristic bidding algorithms, is a viable method for solving combinatorial allocation problems without a centralized auctioneer.

[1]  Craig Boutilier,et al.  Solving Combinatorial Auctions Using Stochastic Local Search , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[2]  José M. Vidal,et al.  Approximate bidding algorithms for a distributed combinatorial auction , 2008, AAMAS.

[3]  D.C. Parkes,et al.  Distributed implementations of Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanisms , 2004, Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2004. AAMAS 2004..

[4]  Julie A. Adams,et al.  Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence , 2001, AI Mag..

[5]  Ronald M. Harstad,et al.  Computationally Manageable Combinational Auctions , 1998 .

[6]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Towards a universal test suite for combinatorial auction algorithms , 2000, EC '00.

[7]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Expressive commerce and its application to sourcing: how we conducted $35 billion of generalized combinatorial auctions , 2007, AI Mag..

[8]  Sung-Woo Park,et al.  Auctions with endogenously determined allowable combinations , 2001 .

[9]  Robert C. Holte,et al.  Combinatorial Auctions, Knapsack Problems, and Hill-Climbing Search , 2001, Canadian Conference on AI.

[10]  B. Turner Authors’ Biographical Notes , 1990 .

[11]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Truth revelation in approximately efficient combinatorial auctions , 2002, EC '99.

[12]  Michel Gendreau,et al.  Combinatorial auctions , 2007, Ann. Oper. Res..

[13]  Paula J. Brewer Decentralized computation procurement and computational robustness in a smart market , 1999 .

[14]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  A Test Suite for Combinatorial Auctions , 2005 .

[15]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Iterative Combinatorial Auctions: Theory and Practice , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[16]  Jay M. Tenenbaum AI Meets Web 2.0: Building the Web of Tomorrow, Today , 2006, AI Mag..

[17]  Yoav Shoham,et al.  Taming the Computational Complexity of Combinatorial Auctions: Optimal and Approximate Approaches , 1999, IJCAI.

[18]  P. Cramton Simultaneous Ascending Auctions , 2004 .

[19]  Richard Steinberg,et al.  PAUSE: a computationally tractable combinatorial auction , 2006 .

[20]  F. Kelly,et al.  A Combinatorial Auction with Multiple Winners for Universal Service , 2000 .

[21]  Julian Padget,et al.  Markets vs auctions: Approaches to distributed combinatorial resource scheduling , 2005, Multiagent Grid Syst..

[22]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  Towards Better Approximation of Winner Determination for Combinatorial Auctions with Large Number of Bids , 2006, 2006 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology.

[23]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  Short-time approximation on combinatorial auctions: a comparison on approximated winner determination algorithms , 2007, DEECS '07.

[24]  Noam Nisan,et al.  An efficient approximate allocation algorithm for combinatorial auctions , 2001, EC '01.

[25]  Tuomas Sandholm,et al.  Algorithm for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auctions , 2002, Artif. Intell..

[26]  José M. Vidal,et al.  Bidding algorithms for a distributed combinatorial auction , 2007, AAMAS '07.

[27]  J. Davenport Editor , 1960 .

[28]  Edmund H. Durfee,et al.  Learning nested agent models in an information economy , 1998, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[29]  José M. Vidal,et al.  Algorithms for Distributed Winner Determination in Combinatorial Auctions , 2005, AMEC@AAMAS/TADA@IJCAI.