VERACITY: Overlapping Coalition Formation-Based Double Auction for Heterogeneous Demand and Spectrum Reusability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spectrum auction is one of the most effective solutions to allocate the spectrum resource following the market rules and has attracted much attention from both academia and industry. However, most of the existing studies assume that the spectrum buyers' demands are homogeneous and the interference relationship is fixed without any change with the variation of spectrum. Furthermore, the economical efficiency of auction outcome has not drawn enough attention. That motivates us to design an auction scheme to jointly consider the multi-demand of buyers, heterogeneous spectrum, and economical efficiency. In this paper, we propose a novel overlapping coalition formation-based double auction, called VERACITY, to address this problem. The auctioneer groups the conflict free buyers into the same coalition and allows a buyer to join multiple coalitions based on the heterogeneous demand. Dynamic overlapping coalition formation implemented by the auctioneer is to find the approximately optimal coalition structure corresponding to the economical efficiency outcome, i.e., maximizing the social welfare. Furthermore, we prove that VERACITY is individually rational, budget balanced, truthful, and economically efficient. Simulation results are presented to show the convergence and effectiveness of the proposed VERACITY.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".