MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226538183 · doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2022.3169969

MAGIKS: Fair Multi-Resource Allocation Game Induced by Kalai-Smorodinsky Bargaining Solution

2022· article· en· W4226538183 on OpenAlexafffund
Erfan Meskar, Ben Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceServerResource allocationResource (disambiguation)Game theoryNash equilibriumMathematical economicsMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the problem of fair and efficient mechanism design for allocating multiple resources in multiple servers among a set of users with Leontief utilities. This problem is motivated by a mobile edge computing environment where each mobile user cannot establish a wireless connection simultaneously to multiple edge servers. Each user is a selfish utility maximizing agent that chooses a single server for its job execution. When a server is shared by multiple users, a resource allocation rule decides the utility that each user must receive. Our goal is to design a mechanism that always admits a Nash Equilibrium (NE), i.e., a state where no user has incentive to change its server, that (1) can be reached in polynomial time and (2) provides fair and efficient resource allocation. We propose the Multi-resource Allocation Game Induced by Kalai-Smorodinsky bargaining solution (MAGIKS) and prove that under discrete resource demands it finds an NE in <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\mathcal {O}({\textrm {poly}(n)})$ </tex-math></inline-formula> moves for any fixed server configuration, where <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$n$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is the number of users. Furthermore, MAGIKS satisfies envy-freeness, sharing incentive, and Pareto optimality on each server. Regarding fairness among users in different servers, we prove that MAGIKS satisfies 2-approximate envy-freeness and maximin share guarantee. Moreover, we show that 2-approximate envy-freeness is the best that any mechanism that satisfies local Pareto optimality can achieve at its NEs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0110.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications SocietySame topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207