Efficient Path Planning and Truthful Incentive Mechanism Design for Mobile Crowdsensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile crowdsensing (MCS) is a promising paradigm for large-scale sensing. A group of users are recruited as workers to accomplish various sensing tasks and provide data to the platform and requesters. A key problem in MCS is to design the incentive mechanism, which can attract enough workers to participate in sensing activities and maintain the truthfulness. As the main advantage of MCS, user mobility is a factor that must be considered. We make an attempt to build a technical framework for MCS, which is associated with a truthful incentive mechanism taking the movements of numerous workers into account. Our proposed framework contains two challenging problems: path planning and incentive mechanism design. In the path planning problem, every worker independently plans a tour to carry out the posted tasks according to its own strategy. A heuristic algorithm is proposed for the path planning problem, which is compared with two baseline algorithms and the optimal solution. In the incentive mechanism design, the platform develops a truthful mechanism to select the winners and determine their payments. The proposed mechanism is proved to be computationally efficient, individually rational, and truthful. In order to evaluate the performance of our proposed mechanism, the well-known Vickrey⁻Clarke⁻Groves (VCG) mechanism is considered as a baseline. Simulations are conducted to evaluate the performance of our proposed framework. The results show that the proposed heuristic algorithm for the path planning problem outperforms the baseline algorithms and approaches the optimal solution. Meanwhile, the proposed mechanism holds a smaller total payment compared with the VCG mechanism when both mechanisms achieve the same performance. Finally, the utility of a selected winner shows the truthfulness of proposed mechanism by changing its bid.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".