A Game Theoretic Solution for the Territory Sharing Problem in Social Taxi Networks

Recent years have witnessed a surge of new methods by which commuters are accessing transportation modals. The use of social taxi networks is one of the most promising door-to-door transportation methods. In social taxi networks, commuters use their smart devices to contact social taxi service providers based on their geographical proximity and the listed fare prices. These taxis can be traditional taxis or privately owned vehicles. However, with the success of this new car hailing mechanism, there is an emergence of a number of problems. One of these problems is the territory allocation problem. i.e., the majority of social taxi drivers choose areas in which the most likely number of customers will be present. Therefore, they negatively impact each other’s profit by offering a high supply of services. This paper develops a cooperative territory allocation approach such that, through negotiation between service providers, can reduce the conflict between taxi drivers. Game theory is used to formulate the territory sharing problem, which can be solved using bargaining-based solution model. The solution model is designed to correspond to a no regret game for which the outcome corresponds to a coarse correlated equilibrium. Simulation work results are provided to support the findings in this paper.

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

[2]  Edith Elkind,et al.  Cooperative Game Theory , 2016, Economics and Computation.

[3]  Ishfaq Ahmad,et al.  Non-cooperative, semi-cooperative, and cooperative games-based grid resource allocation , 2006, Proceedings 20th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium.

[4]  John N. Tsitsiklis,et al.  Efficiency loss in a network resource allocation game: the case of elastic supply , 2005, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[5]  J. Byers,et al.  The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry , 2017 .

[6]  Catherine Lee Rassman Regulating Rideshare Without Stifling Innovation: Examining the Drivers, the Insurance "Gap," and Why Pennsylvania Should Get on Board , 2015 .

[7]  Éva Tardos,et al.  Strong Price of Anarchy and Coalitional Dynamics , 2013, ArXiv.

[8]  Zhu Han,et al.  Game-theoretic resource allocation methods for device-to-device communication , 2014, IEEE Wireless Communications.

[9]  Liviu Iftode,et al.  Smart Phone: an embedded system for universal interactions , 2004, Proceedings. 10th IEEE International Workshop on Future Trends of Distributed Computing Systems, 2004. FTDCS 2004..

[10]  M. Shamim Hossain,et al.  Cooperative game-based distributed resource allocation in horizontal dynamic cloud federation platform , 2012, Information Systems Frontiers.

[11]  Umang Bhaskar,et al.  Routing games , 2012 .

[12]  Susan Shaheen,et al.  App-Based, On-Demand Ride Services: Comparing Taxi and Ridesourcing Trips and User Characteristics in San Francisco , 2014 .

[13]  G. Hardin,et al.  The Tragedy of the Commons , 1968, Green Planet Blues.

[14]  Thomas D. Clark,et al.  Taxi management and route control: a systems study and simulation experiment , 1992, WSC '92.

[15]  Elias Koutsoupias,et al.  The price of anarchy of finite congestion games , 2005, STOC '05.

[16]  Boi Faltings,et al.  Symmetric Subgame Perfect Equilibria in Resource Allocation , 2021, AAAI.

[17]  Liviu Iftode,et al.  EZCab: A Cab Booking Application Using Short-Range Wireless Communication , 2005, Third IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications.

[18]  Hussein M. Abdel-Wahab,et al.  A proportional share resource allocation algorithm for real-time, time-shared systems , 1996, 17th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[19]  Bruce Hajek,et al.  Do Greedy Autonomous Systems Make for a Sensible Internet , 2003 .

[20]  S. Hart,et al.  A simple adaptive procedure leading to correlated equilibrium , 2000 .

[21]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  Intrinsic Robustness of the Price of Anarchy , 2015, J. ACM.

[22]  Jeffrey K. MacKie-Mason,et al.  Pricing Congestible Network Resources (Invited Paper) , 1995, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[23]  R. Aumann Subjectivity and Correlation in Randomized Strategies , 1974 .

[24]  M. Dufwenberg Game theory. , 2011, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[25]  Raj Jain,et al.  A Quantitative Measure Of Fairness And Discrimination For Resource Allocation In Shared Computer Systems , 1998, ArXiv.

[26]  Darrell Hoy The concavity of atomic splittable congestion games with non-linear utility functions , 2012 .

[27]  Gérard P. Cachon,et al.  The Role of Surge Pricing on a Service Platform with Self-Scheduling Capacity , 2016, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

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

[29]  Li Cong,et al.  Competitive Resource Sharing Based on Game Theory in Cooperative Relay Networks , 2009 .

[30]  Qiang Meng,et al.  A decision support system for vehicle relocation operations in carsharing systems , 2009 .

[31]  Stef Tijs Cooperative game theory and or-models , 2000 .

[32]  Nigel Walton Taxi Apps Could Transform Global Transport Models. , 2014 .

[33]  Simone Weikl,et al.  Relocation Strategies and Algorithms for Free-Floating Car Sharing Systems , 2012, IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine.

[34]  Yakar Kannai,et al.  The core and balancedness , 1992 .

[35]  J. Nash THE BARGAINING PROBLEM , 1950, Classics in Game Theory.

[36]  Stef Tijs,et al.  Models in Cooperative Game Theory , 2008 .

[37]  G. Knieps Network neutrality and the evolution of the internet , 2011 .