MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Leader Multi-Follower Game-based Incentive Scheme for Socially-Aware Mobile Crowdsensing

2021· article· en· W3163552455 on OpenAlexaff
Jiangtian Nie, Jun Luo, Zehui Xiong, Dusit Niyato, Ping Wang, Yang Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersState Key Laboratory of Industrial Control TechnologyZhejiang UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsStackelberg competitionIncentiveComputer scienceService providerCrowdsensingContext (archaeology)Game theoryService (business)Nash equilibriumInternet privacyComputer securityBusinessMicroeconomicsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the paradigm of crowdsensing involves the data collection from users, the issue of designing reward to incentivize the users is fundamentally important to be addressed, thereby effectively enhancing the participation. In this paper, we revisit this issue in the context of socially-aware crowdsensing which integrates crowdsensing into social networks. For example, in crowdsensing-based healthcare services, the accuracy of diet recommendation for a certain user can be promoted by exploiting the nutritional information contributed and shared by the socially-connected friends of him/her taking similar types of food. To be more general and practical, we study the incentive schemes in presence of multiple crowdsensing service providers and multiple users. Understanding the behaviors of users and service providers in socially-aware crowdsensing is of paramount importance for incentive schemes. Considering this, we propose a multi-leader and multi-follower Stackelberg game approach to model the strategic interactions among service providers and users, where the social influence of users and the strategic interconnections of service providers are jointly and formally integrated into the game modeling. Through backward induction methods, we theoretically validate the existence and uniqueness of the Stackelberg equilibrium. Simulations are conducted to evaluate game equilibrium properties, and the results are presented to assess and demonstrate the performance effectiveness of the proposed game model.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.822
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207