Publication:

Overcoming Rational Manipulation in Distributed Mechanism Implementations

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2003

Published Version

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Shneidman, Jeffrey, David C. Parkes, and Margo Seltzer. 2003. Overcoming Rational Manipulation in Distributed Mechanism Implementations. Harvard Computer Science Group Technical Report TR-12-03.

Abstract

Distributed systems are increasingly made up of nodes governed by disparate self-interested parties. These parties can be modeled as rational (in a game theoretic sense) utility-maximizing players that participate in a distributed algorithm. These rational nodes may choose to deviate from a given specification to increase their utility, but alternatively can be incented to correctly implement part of a distributed mechanism. In dealing with rational agents in distributed systems, computer science has taken a cue from the economics subfield of mechanism design (MD) with recent work in distributed algorithmic mechanism design (DAMD). Previously, work in MD and DAMD has focused on manipulation in agent strategy. However, there are other manipulations available to agents that can damage mechanism implementations. As designers begin to inject mechanism design ideas into distributed systems, non-manipulatability of mechanisms becomes more important. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: We identify four areas of manipulation in mechanism implementations, as well as environmental assumptions that can affect agent behavior. We introduce two properties for non-manipulatable mechanism implementations, communication- and algorithm compatibility, and identify techniques that can be used to achieve these properties. Our wider agenda is that future mechanism design implementation work (centralized or distributed) be done with consideration of these two non-manipulatability properties. To illustrate how this might be done, we demonstrate one way to bring communication- and algorithm compatibility to a well-defined lowest cost interdomain routing problem proposed by Feigenbaum, Papadimitriou, Sami, and Shenker (FPSS) [11]. Our approach does not add significant new processing or communication overhead to the distributed FPSS algorithm. Our end result is an incentive-compatible, communication-compatible, and algorithm-compatible distributed mechanism.

Description

Other Available Sources

Research Data

Keywords

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Related Stories