Traditional regulatory methods for spectrum licensing have been recently identified as one of the causes for the under-utilization of the valuable radio spectrum. Governmental agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) are seeking ways to remove stringent regulatory barriers and facilitate broader access to the spectrum resources. The goal is to allow for an improved and ubiquitous sharing of the precious radio spectrum between commercial service providers. In this paper, we propose a novel noncooperative game theoretic approach, to show how to foster more sharing of the radio spectrum via the use of regulatory power. We define a two stage game in which the government regulators move first, followed by the providers. The providers are incentivized by lower spectrum allocation fees from the regulators in return for proof-of-sharing. The providers are offered discounted spectrum bands, potentially at different locations, but will be asked to provide coverage to users that are not subscribed to them so as to maintain their subsidy incentives from the government. In a simplification of the model, analytical expressions for the providers' perfect equilibrium strategies are derived, and we argue for the existence of the government's part of a perfect equilibrium. Our analysis shows that through subsidization, the government can provide small service providers a fair chance to compete with the large providers, thereby avoiding monopolization in the market.
Regulatory practice has been part of the wireless market since its inception as the resource being shared was soon recognized to be very valuable. Governmental agencies establish regulatory policies to increase the efficiency of the spectrum market while preserving an acceptable level of fairness in sharing the precious spectrum. The concept of subsidization is one way to involve the government so as to incentivize various long-term goals in the market being regulated. Typically, subsidy regulations are used for markets serving the larger good'' (i.e., the benefit of the whole society) and involving a significant amount of cost producers cannot bare individually. Transportation @cite_25 , agriculture @cite_18 and telecommunications @cite_24 are examples of such markets where new initiatives require significant infrastructure investments, and hence the government's involvement is justified. However, subsidization is known to have negative effects on the efficiency of the market. Thus, subsidization is preferred if at all possible.
@cite_24 @cite_18 @cite_25
2091927099 1561702655
Unlike telephone operators, which pay termination fees to reach the users of another network, Internet Content Providers (CPs) do not pay the Internet Service Providers (ISPs) of users they reach. While the consequent cross subsidization to CPs has nurtured content innovations at the edge of the Internet, it reduces the investment incentives for the access ISPs to expand capacity. As potential charges for terminating CPs' traffic are criticized under the net neutrality debate, we propose to allow CPs to voluntarily subsidize the usagebased fees induced by their content traffic for end-users. We model the regulated subsidization competition among CPs under a neutral network and show how deregulation of subsidization could increase an access ISP's utilization and revenue, strengthening its investment incentives. Although the competition might harm certain CPs, we find that the main cause comes from high access prices rather than the existence of subsidization. Our results suggest that subsidization competition will increase the competitiveness and welfare of the Internet content market; however, regulators might need to regulate access prices if the access ISP market is not competitive enough. We envision that subsidization competition could become a viable model for the future Internet. Dynamic spectrum access is a new paradigm of secondary spectrum utilization and sharing. It allows unlicensed secondary users (SUs) to exploit the opportunistically underutilized licensed spectrum. Market mechanism is a widely used promising means to regulate the consuming behaviours of users and, hence, achieve the efficient allocation and consumption of limited resources. In this paper, we propose and study a hybrid secondary spectrum market consisting of both the futures market and the spot market, in which SUs (buyers) purchase underutilized licensed spectrum from a spectrum regulator (SR), either through predefined contracts via the futures market, or through spot transactions via the spot market. We focus on the optimal spectrum allocation among SUs in an exogenous hybrid market that maximizes the secondary spectrum utilization efficiency. The problem is challenging because of the stochasticity and asymmetry of network information. To solve this problem, we first derive an off-line optimal allocatio... Unlike markets for storable commodities, electricity markets depend on the real-time balance of supply and demand. Although much of the present-day grid operates effectively without storage, cost-effective ways of storing electrical energy can help make the grid more efficient and reliable. We investigate the economics of two emerging electric energy storage (EES) technologies: sodium sulfur batteries and flywheel energy storage systems in New York state's electricity market. The analysis indicates that there is a strong economic case for EES installations in the New York City region for applications such as energy arbitrage, and that significant opportunities exist throughout New York state for regulation services. Benefits from deferral of system upgrades may be important in the decision to deploy EES. Market barriers currently make it difficult for energy-limited EES such as flywheels to receive revenue for voltage regulation. Charging efficiency is more important to the economics of EES in a competitive electricity market than has generally been recognized. Cybercrime activities are supported by infrastructures and services originating from an underground economy. The current understanding of this phenomenon is that the cybercrime economy ought to be fraught with information asymmetry and adverse selection problems. They should make the effects that we observe every day impossible to sustain. In this paper, we show that the market structure and design used by cyber criminals have evolved toward a market design that is similar to legitimate, thriving, online forum markets such as eBay. We illustrate this evolution by comparing the market regulatory mechanisms of two underground forum markets: 1) a failed market for credit cards and other illegal goods and 2) another, extremely active marketplace for vulnerabilities, exploits, and cyber attacks in general. The comparison shows that cybercrime markets evolved from unruly, scam for scammers market mechanisms to mature, regulated mechanisms that greatly favors trade efficiency. Cloud providers have begun to allow users to bid for surplus servers on a spot market. These servers are allocated if a user's bid price is higher than their market price and revoked otherwise. Thus, analyzing price data to derive optimal bidding strategies has become a popular research topic. In this paper, we argue that sophisticated bidding strategies, in practice, do not provide any advantages over simple strategies for multiple reasons. First, due to price characteristics, there are a wide range of bid prices that yield the optimal cost and availability. Second, given the large number of spot markets, there is always a market with available surplus resources. Thus, if resources become unavailable due to a price spike, users need not wait until the spike subsides, but can instead provision a new spot resource elsewhere and migrate to it. Third, current spot market rules enable users to place maximum bids for resources without any penalty. Given bidding's irrelevance, users can adopt trivial bidding strategies and focus instead on modifying applications to efficiently seek out and migrate to the lowest cost resources. Mechanism design for one-sided markets is an area of extensive research in economics and, since more than a decade, in computer science as well. Two-sided markets, on the other hand, have not received the same attention despite the numerous applications to web advertisement, stock exchange, and frequency spectrum allocation. This work studies double auctions, in which unit-demand buyers and unit-supply sellers act strategically. An ideal goal in double auction design is to maximize the social welfare of buyers and sellers with individually rational (IR), incentive compatible (IC) and strongly budget-balanced (SBB) mechanisms. The first two properties are standard. SBB requires that the payments charged to the buyers are entirely handed to the sellers. This property is crucial in all the contexts that do not allow the auctioneer retaining a share of buyers' payments or subsidizing the market. Unfortunately, this goal is known to be unachievable even for the special case of bilateral trade, where there is only one buyer and one seller. Therefore, in subsequent papers, meaningful trade-offs between these requirements have been investigated. Our main contribution is the first IR, IC and SBB mechanism that provides an O(1)-approximation to the optimal social welfare. This result holds for any number of buyers and sellers with arbitrary, independent distributions. Moreover, our result continues to hold when there is an additional matroid constraint on the sets of buyers who may get allocated an item. To prove our main result, we devise an extension of sequential posted price mechanisms to two-sided markets. In addition to this, we improve the best-known approximation bounds for the bilateral trade problem. Due to the emergence of smart devices, mobile data traffic grows exponentially. A Cisco report predicts that global mobile data traffic will increase 26-fold between 2010 and 2015. Therefore, the spectrum shortage continues and the spectrum price increases, which will eventually lead to decrease of user welfare. Another side effect of the data traffic growth is the polarization of data traffic among users. To resolve these problems, we introduce two subsidy schemes (i.e., price and quality of service (QoS) subsidy schemes) and mathematically analyze the effect of each scheme. We identify that if the regulator has sufficient spectrum amount for the network service, then the QoS subsidy scheme will be a good choice for all players in the network service market. Otherwise, the price subsidy scheme can be better from user welfare perspective. Even though our analytic results are derived under some assumptions for mathematical tractability, it will provide good intuitions for spectrum regulation. The unparalleled success of mobile technologies, the emergence of new modes of software and hardware production, and the free circulation of shared knowledge in the Web 2.0 have enabled a new generation of bottom-up, community-based, cost-effective telecommunications initiatives and projects. While these endeavours find their roots in previous hobbyists' movements (i.e. amateur radio, software hackers, do-it-yourself communities) today's' initiatives are able to connect, co-produce and share knowledge with world-wide communities, engaging new participants both at the local and the global level. This article reviews recent developments that aim to provide free or low-cost access to telecommunication services in different areas. From Do-It-Yourself (DIY) satellites to mesh networks, these projects tap into the wisdom and resources of communities to offer non-commercial alternatives to present telecommunications services. The technology, organisational, and regulatory challenges they also face cannot be underestimated either. However, in their struggle to find and consolidate new markets, affordable telecommunications reveal that a new digital economy based on co-production could be under way. Recently issued U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulations require comparable treatment of demand reduction and generation in the wholesale electric market so that they are compensated at the same market clearing price. The new regulations measure demand reduction as a reduction from a “customer baseline,” a historically based estimate of the expected consumption. In this paper, we study the incentive effects on the efficiency of the demand response regulation using a static equilibrium model and a dynamic extension of the model. Our analysis provides three main results. Firstly, our analysis shows that the demand reduction payment will induce consumers to (1) inflate the customer baseline by increasing consumption above the already excessive level during normal peak periods and (2) exaggerate demand reduction by decreasing consumption beyond the efficient level during a demand response event. This result persists when applied to alternative baseline designs in a dynamic model. Secondly, we study alternative policy remedies to restore the efficiency of demand response regulation and introduce a new approach to define the customer baseline as a fixed proportion of an aggregate baseline. In particular, the aggregate baseline approach can significantly weaken or eliminate the incentive to inflate the baseline. Finally, we illustrate that if the baseline inflation problem is solved and demand and supply functions are linear, the current policy can produce a net social welfare gain. However, the welfare improvement requires that demand reduction be paid only when the wholesale price is at least twice the fixed retail rate. This argues that the policy should include a sufficiently high threshold price below which demand response is not dispatched. The concept of dynamic spectrum access (DSA) enables the licensed spectrum to be traded in an open market where the unlicensed users can freely buy and use the available licensed spectrum bands. However, like in the other traditional commodity markets, spectrum trading is inevitably accompanied by various competitions and challenges. In this paper, we study an important business competition activity - price war in the DSA market. A non-cooperative pricing game is formulated to model the contention among multiple wireless spectrum providers for higher market share and revenues. We calculate the Pareto optimal pricing strategies for all providers and analyze the motivations behind the price war. The potential responses to the price war are in-depth discussed. Numerical results demonstrate the efficiency of the Pareto optimal strategy for the game and the impact of the price war to all participants. Prediction markets are economic mechanisms for aggregating information about future events through sequential interactions with traders. The pricing mechanisms in these markets are known to be related to optimization algorithms in machine learning and through these connections we have some understanding of how equilibrium market prices relate to the beliefs of the traders in a market. However, little is known about rates and guarantees for the convergence of these sequential mechanisms, and two recent papers cite this as an important open question. In this paper we show how some previously studied prediction market trading models can be understood as a natural generalization of randomized coordinate descent which we call randomized subspace descent (RSD). We establish convergence rates for RSD and leverage them to prove rates for the two prediction market models above, answering the open questions. Our results extend beyond standard centralized markets to arbitrary trade networks. This research investigates how different levels of modeling can be applied to assess the mobility impacts of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC), as an example of connected vehicle technologies on Managed Lanes (ML) with various incentives (preferential treatments), pricing strategies, and access restrictions. The transportation modeling in this study involves the use of the Static Traffic Assignment (STA) of a demand forecasting model based on a macroscopic traffic model, mesoscopic simulation-based Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA), and results from microscopic simulation modeling. The results of this study demonstrate the benefit of using results from tools with different resolution of modeling to support each other’s analyses. In general, the trends obtained based on results from the STA modeling of advanced vehicle technologies in terms of the market share of traffic in ML and the reduction in congestion on General Purpose Lanes (GPL) are consistent with those obtained from DTA. However, DTA results show more significant shifts due to its better modeling of traffic congestion. The results also show that providing toll incentives for CACC-equipped vehicles to use express lanes is not beneficial at lower market penetration due to the small increase in capacity with these market penetrations. Such incentives are beneficial at higher market penetrations, particularly with higher demand levels. The dynamic spectrum market (DSM) is a key economic vehicle for realizing the opportunistic spectrum access that will mitigate the anticipated spectrum-scarcity problem. DSM allows legacy spectrum owners to lease their channels to unlicensed spectrum consumers (or secondary users) in order to increase their revenue and improve spectrum utilization. In DSM, determining the optimal spectrum leasing price is an important yet challenging problem that requires a comprehensive understanding of market participants' interests and interactions. In this paper, we study spectrum pricing competition in a duopoly DSM, where two wireless service providers (WSPs) lease spectrum access rights, and secondary users (SUs) purchase the spectrum use to maximize their utility. We identify two essential, but previously overlooked, properties of DSM: 1) heterogeneous spectrum resources at WSPs and 2) spectrum sharing among SUs. We demonstrate the impact of spectrum heterogeneity via an in-depth measurement study using a software-defined radio (SDR) testbed. We then study the impacts of spectrum heterogeneity on WSPs' optimal pricing and SUs' WSP selection strategies using a systematic three-step approach. First, we study how spectrum sharing among SUs subscribed to the same WSP affects the SUs' achievable utility. Then, we derive the SUs' optimal WSP selection strategy that maximizes their payoff, given the heterogeneous spectrum propagation characteristics and prices. We analyze how individual SU preferences affect market evolution and prove the market convergence to a mean-field limit, even though SUs make local decisions. Finally, given the market evolution, we formulate the WSPs' pricing strategies in a duopoly DSM as a noncooperative game and identify its Nash equilibrium points. We find that the equilibrium price and its uniqueness depend on the SUs' geographical density and spectrum propagation characteristics. Our analytical framework reveals the impact of spectrum heterogeneity in a real-world DSM, and can be used as a guideline for the WSPs' pricing strategies. The interaction of a content provider with end users on an infrastructure platform built and maintained by a service provider can be viewed as a two-sided market. Content sponsoring, i.e., charging the content provider instead of viewers for resources consumed in viewing the content, can benefit all parties involved. Without being charged directly or having it counted against their monthly data quotas, end users will view more content, allowing the content provider to generate more advertising revenue, extracted by the service provider to subsidize its investment and operation of the network infrastructure. However, realizing such gains requires a proper contractual relationship between the service provider and content provider. We consider the determination of this contract through a Stackelberg game. The service provider sets a pricing schedule for sponsoring and the content provider responds by deciding how much content to sponsor. We analyze the best strategies for the content provider and service provider in the event that the underlying demand for the content is uncertain. Two separate settings are defined. In the first, end users can be charged for non-sponsored views on a per-byte basis. In the second we extend the model to the more common case in which end users purchase data quotas on a periodic basis. Our main conclusion is that a coordinating contract can be designed that maximizes total system profit. Moreover, the additional profit due to sponsoring can be split between the content provider and service provider in an arbitrary manner. As Internet traffic grows exponentially due to the pervasive Internet accesses via mobile devices and increasing adoptions of cloud-based applications, broadband providers start to shift from flat-rate to usage-based pricing, which has gained support from regulators such as the FCC. We consider generic congestion-prone network services and study usage-based pricing of service providers under market competition. Based on a novel model that captures users' preferences over price and congestion alternatives, we derive the induced congestion and market share of the service providers under a market equilibrium and design algorithms to calculate them. By analyzing different market structures, we reveal how users' value on usage and sensitivity to congestion influence the optimal price, revenue, and competition of service providers, as well as the social welfare. We also obtain the conditions under which monopolistic providers have strong incentives to implement service differentiation via Paris Metro Pricing and whether regulators should encourage such practices. In this article, we study the problem of online market clearing where there is one commodity in the market being bought and sold by multiple buyers and sellers whose bids arrive and expire at different times. The auctioneer is faced with an online clearing problem of deciding which buy and sell bids to match without knowing what bids will arrive in the future. For maximizing profit, we present a (randomized) online algorithm with a competitive ratio of ln(pmax − pmin) p 1, when bids are in a range [pmin, pmax], which we show is the best possible. A simpler algorithm has a ratio twice this, and can be used even if expiration times are not known. For maximizing the number of trades, we present a simple greedy algorithm that achieves a factor of 2 competitive ratio if no money-losing trades are allowed. We also show that if the online algorithm is allowed to subsidize matches---match money-losing pairs if it has already collected enough money from previous pairs to pay for them---then it can actually be 1-competitive with respect to the optimal offline algorithm that is not allowed subsidy. That is, for maximizing the number of trades, the ability to subsidize is at least as valuable as knowing the future. We also consider objectives of maximizing buy or sell volume and social welfare. We present all of these results as corollaries of theorems on online matching in an incomplete interval graph.We also consider the issue of incentive compatibility, and develop a nearly optimal incentive-compatible algorithm for maximizing social welfare. For maximizing profit, we show that no incentive-compatible algorithm can achieve a sublinear competitive ratio, even if only one buy bid and one sell bid are alive at a time. However, we provide an algorithm that, under certain mild assumptions on the bids, performs nearly as well as the best fixed pair of buy and sell prices, a weaker but still natural performance measure. This latter result uses online learning methods, and we also show how such methods can be used to improve our “optimal” algorithms to a broader notion of optimality. Finally, we show how some of our results can be generalized to settings in which the buyers and sellers themselves have online bidding strategies, rather than just each having individual bids. As Internet traffic grows exponentially due to the pervasive Internet accesses via mobile devices and increasing adoptions of cloud-based applications, broadband providers start to shift from flat-rate to usage-based pricing, which has gained support from regulators such as the FCC. We consider generic congestion-prone network services, including cloud services, and study the pay-as-you-go type of usage-based pricing of service providers under market competition. Based on a novel model that captures users' preferences over usage price and congestion alternatives, we derive the induced congestion and market share of the service providers under a market equilibrium and design algorithms to calculate them. By analyzing different market structures, we reveal how users' value on usage and sensitivity to congestion influence the optimal price, revenue, and competition of service providers, as well as the social welfare. We also obtain the conditions under which monopolistic providers have strong incentives to implement service differentiation via Paris Metro Pricing and whether regulators should encourage such practices. In the traffic assignment problem, first proposed by Wardrop in 1952, commuters select the shortest available path to travel from their origins to their destinations. We study a generalization of this problem in which competitors, who may control a nonnegligible fraction of the total flow, ship goods across a network. This type of games, usually referred to as atomic games, readily applies to situations in which the competing freight companies have market power. Other applications include intelligent transportation systems, competition among telecommunication network service providers, and scheduling with flexible machines. Our goal is to determine to what extent these systems can benefit from some form of coordination or regulation. We measure the quality of the outcome of the game without centralized control by computing the worst-case inefficiency of Nash equilibria. The main conclusion is that although self-interested competitors will not achieve a fully efficient solution from the system's point of view, the loss is not too severe. We show how to compute several bounds for the worst-case inefficiency that depend on the characteristics of cost functions and on the market structure in the game. In addition, building upon the work of Catoni and Pallotino, we show examples in which market aggregation (or collusion) adversely impacts the aggregated competitors, even though their market power increases. For example, Nash equilibria of atomic network games may be less efficient than the corresponding Wardrop equilibria. When competitors are completely symmetric, we provide a characterization of the Nash equilibrium using a potential function, and prove that this counterintuitive phenomenon does not arise. Finally, we study a pricing mechanism that elicits more coordination from the players by reducing the worst-case inefficiency of Nash equilibria. Online social networks (OSNs) have become one of the most effective channels for marketing and advertising. Since users are often influenced by their friends, “word-of-mouth” exchanges, so-called viral marketing, in social networks can be used to increase product adoption or widely spread content over the network. The common perception of viral marketing about being cheap, easy, and massively effective makes it an ideal replacement of traditional advertising. However, recent studies have revealed that the propagation often fades quickly within only few hops from the sources, counteracting the assumption on the self-perpetuating of influence considered in literature. With only limited influence propagation, is massively reaching customers via viral marketing still affordable? How do we economically spend more resources to increase the spreading speed? We investigate the cost-effective massive viral marketing problem, taking into the consideration the limited influence propagation. Both analytical analysis based on power-law network theory and numerical analysis demonstrate that the viral marketing might involve costly seeding. To minimize the seeding cost, we provide mathematical programming to find optimal seeding for medium-size networks and propose VirAds, an efficient algorithm, to tackle the problem on large-scale networks. VirAds guarantees a relative error bound of @math from the optimal solutions in power-law networks and outperforms the greedy heuristics that realizes on the degree centrality. Moreover, we also show that, in general, approximating the optimal seeding within a ratio better than @math is unlikely possible. We address the optimal bidding problem of an aggregator that manages the charging of a group of plug-in electric vehicles. The aggregator purchases energy in the day-ahead market, and offers capacity in the frequency regulation market. The charging flexibility of the fleet is expressed as a set of time-varying power and energy constraints. The impact of the aggregator's demand on day-ahead market prices is endogenously modelled by formulating the problem as a bilevel problem: The upper level represents the aggregator's cost minimisation, and the lower level represents the market clearing. We explore several settings of the regulation market, analysing the impact of restrictions that may apply on the capacity offers (e.g., symmetric bids). Moreover, we compare the options of providing regulation with unidirectional charging, and with vehicle-to-grid (V2G). We test the proposed method in a case study for Switzerland, with historical day-ahead and regulation market data, and realistic driving patterns.