MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1889437849 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511973369.011

Optimal pricing for mobile video streaming

2011· book-chapter· en· W1889437849 on OpenAlexaff
Huanhuan Zhao, W. Sabrina Lin, K. J. Ray Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDigital Platforms and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService providerProfit (economics)Redistribution (election)Mobile phoneComputer scienceMobile QoSPhoneInternet privacyBusinessMobile telephonyService (business)TelecommunicationsMobile radioMarketingMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile phones are among the most popular consumer devices; the recent developments of 3G networks and smart phones enable users to watch video programs by subscribing to data plans from service providers. Because of the ubiquity of mobile phones and phone-to-phone communication technologies, subscribers can redistribute the video content to nonsubscribers. Such a redistribution mechanism is a potential competitor for the service provider and is very difficult to trace, given users' high mobility. The service provider must set a reasonable price for the data plan to prevent such unauthorized redistribution behavior and to protect the provider's own profit. In this chapter, we analyze the optimal price setting for the service provider by investigating the equilibrium between the subscribers and the secondary buyers in the content redistribution network. We model the behavior between the subscribers and the secondary buyers as a noncooperative game and find the optimal price and quantity for both groups of users. Such an analysis can help the service provider preserve the profit under the threat of the redistribution networks and can improve the quality of service for end users.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.150 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicDigital Platforms and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207