自私与在线负载均衡中的纳什社会福利

IF 1.1 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation Pub Date : 2020-07-16 DOI:10.1145/3544978
Vittorio Bilò, G. Monaco, L. Moscardelli, Cosimo Vinci
{"title":"自私与在线负载均衡中的纳什社会福利","authors":"Vittorio Bilò, G. Monaco, L. Moscardelli, Cosimo Vinci","doi":"10.1145/3544978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In load-balancing problems there is a set of clients, each wishing to select a resource from a set of permissible ones to execute a certain task. Each resource has a latency function, which depends on its workload, and a client’s cost is the completion time of her chosen resource. Two fundamental variants of load-balancing problems are selfish load balancing (a.k.a. load-balancing games), where clients are non-cooperative selfish players aimed at minimizing their own cost solely, and online load balancing, where clients appear online and have to be irrevocably assigned to a resource without any knowledge about future requests. We revisit both problems under the objective of minimizing the Nash Social Welfare, i.e., the geometric mean of the clients’ costs. To the best of our knowledge, despite being a celebrated welfare estimator in many social contexts, the Nash Social Welfare has not been considered so far as a benchmarking quality measure in load-balancing problems. We provide tight bounds on the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria and on the competitive ratio of the greedy algorithm under very general latency functions, including polynomial ones. For this particular class, we also prove that the greedy strategy is optimal, as it matches the performance of any possible online algorithm.","PeriodicalId":42216,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load Balancing\",\"authors\":\"Vittorio Bilò, G. Monaco, L. Moscardelli, Cosimo Vinci\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3544978\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In load-balancing problems there is a set of clients, each wishing to select a resource from a set of permissible ones to execute a certain task. Each resource has a latency function, which depends on its workload, and a client’s cost is the completion time of her chosen resource. Two fundamental variants of load-balancing problems are selfish load balancing (a.k.a. load-balancing games), where clients are non-cooperative selfish players aimed at minimizing their own cost solely, and online load balancing, where clients appear online and have to be irrevocably assigned to a resource without any knowledge about future requests. We revisit both problems under the objective of minimizing the Nash Social Welfare, i.e., the geometric mean of the clients’ costs. To the best of our knowledge, despite being a celebrated welfare estimator in many social contexts, the Nash Social Welfare has not been considered so far as a benchmarking quality measure in load-balancing problems. We provide tight bounds on the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria and on the competitive ratio of the greedy algorithm under very general latency functions, including polynomial ones. For this particular class, we also prove that the greedy strategy is optimal, as it matches the performance of any possible online algorithm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42216,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3544978\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3544978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

在负载平衡问题中,有一组客户端,每个客户端都希望从一组允许的资源中选择一个资源来执行某个任务。每个资源都有一个延迟函数,这取决于其工作负载,而客户的成本是她选择的资源的完成时间。负载平衡问题的两个基本变体是自私负载平衡(也称为负载平衡游戏)和在线负载平衡,前者的客户是不合作的自私玩家,其目的仅是最大限度地降低自身成本;后者的客户出现在网上,必须在不知道未来请求的情况下不可撤销地分配给资源。我们在最小化纳什社会福利(即客户成本的几何平均值)的目标下重新审视了这两个问题。据我们所知,尽管纳什社会福利在许多社会背景下都是一个著名的福利估算者,但到目前为止,纳什社会福利还没有被视为负载平衡问题的基准质量衡量标准。我们给出了纯纳什均衡的无政府状态价格和贪婪算法在非常一般的潜伏函数(包括多项式潜伏函数)下的竞争比的紧界。对于这个特定的类,我们还证明了贪婪策略是最优的,因为它与任何可能的在线算法的性能相匹配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load Balancing
In load-balancing problems there is a set of clients, each wishing to select a resource from a set of permissible ones to execute a certain task. Each resource has a latency function, which depends on its workload, and a client’s cost is the completion time of her chosen resource. Two fundamental variants of load-balancing problems are selfish load balancing (a.k.a. load-balancing games), where clients are non-cooperative selfish players aimed at minimizing their own cost solely, and online load balancing, where clients appear online and have to be irrevocably assigned to a resource without any knowledge about future requests. We revisit both problems under the objective of minimizing the Nash Social Welfare, i.e., the geometric mean of the clients’ costs. To the best of our knowledge, despite being a celebrated welfare estimator in many social contexts, the Nash Social Welfare has not been considered so far as a benchmarking quality measure in load-balancing problems. We provide tight bounds on the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria and on the competitive ratio of the greedy algorithm under very general latency functions, including polynomial ones. For this particular class, we also prove that the greedy strategy is optimal, as it matches the performance of any possible online algorithm.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation
ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation welcomes submissions of the highest quality that concern the intersection of computer science and economics. Of interest to the journal is any topic relevant to both economists and computer scientists, including but not limited to the following: Agents in networks Algorithmic game theory Computation of equilibria Computational social choice Cost of strategic behavior and cost of decentralization ("price of anarchy") Design and analysis of electronic markets Economics of computational advertising Electronic commerce Learning in games and markets Mechanism design Paid search auctions Privacy Recommendation / reputation / trust systems Systems resilient against malicious agents.
期刊最新文献
Convexity in Real-time Bidding and Related Problems Matching Tasks and Workers under Known Arrival Distributions: Online Task Assignment with Two-sided Arrivals Blockchain-Based Decentralized Reward Sharing: The case of mining pools Editorial from the New Co-Editors-in-Chief of ACM Transactions on Economics and Computation Price of Anarchy in Algorithmic Matching of Romantic Partners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1