Skip to main content
Log in

Coincident Cost Improvement vs. Degradation by Adding Connections to Noncooperative Networks and Distributed Systems

  • Published:
Networks and Spatial Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In computer and transportation networks, we consider the situation where each user has its own routing or load balancing decision and seeks to minimize noncooperatively the expected passage time of its packet or job, given the routing or load balancing decisions of other users. Intuitively, it is anticipated that adding connections to such a noncooperative system may bring cost improvement at least to some users. The Braess paradox is, however, the first example of paradoxical cases where it is not always the case. A few studies have been published on the degrees of coincident cost degradation for all users by adding connections. In contrast, it has not been certain whether or to what degree adding connections to a network can bring coincident cost improvement for all users. We believe that this paper is the first one that studies the possible degrees of coincident cost improvement for all users by adding connections to noncooperative systems. There has been found no system in Wardrop equilibrium for which the degree of degradation can increase without bound by adding connections with the number of nodes fixed. We show that there exist systems in Wardrop equilibria and ones in Nash equilibria for both of which the degree of coincident cost improvement can increase without bound for all users by adding connections, even if the number of nodes is fixed. We then study, for models reflecting realistic distributed systems, the effects of adding connections to them on the coincident cost improvement or degradation for all users.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We only consider the cases where C i (S) > 0 for all i. In the case where there are such i’s that C i (S) ≤ 0 for some i, we replace C i (S) by C i (S) + C for all i where C is a constant such that C i (S) + C > 0 for all i. By this replacement, we would not have any essential change in our arguments.

References

  • Altman E, Wynter L (2004) Equilibrium, games, and pricing in transportation and telecommunication networks. Network Spatial Econ 4(1):7–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braess D (1968) Über ein Paradoxen aus der Verkehrsplanung. Unternehmensforschung 12:258–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen J, Druschel P, Subramanian D (1999) A new approach to routing with dynamic metrics. In: Proc. IEEE INFOCOM ’99, New York

  • Cohen JE, Jeffries C (1997) Congestion resulting from increased capacity in single-server queueing networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 5(2):305–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen JE, Kelly FP (1990) A paradox of congestion in a queuing network. J Appl Prob 27:730–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster I, Kesselman C (eds) (1998) The grid: blueprint for a new computing infrastructure. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Haurie A, Marcotte P (1985) On the relationship between Nash-Cournot and Wardrop equilibria. Networks 15:295–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inoie A, Kameda H, Touati C (2006) A paradox in flow control of M/M/n queues. Comput Oper Res 33:356–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kameda H (2002) How harmful the paradox can be in the Braess/Cohen–Kelly–Jeffries networks. In: Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 2002. New York, pp 437–445

  • Kameda H, Pourtallier O (2002) Paradoxes in distributed decisions on optimal load balancing for networks of homogeneous computers. J ACM 49(3):407–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kameda H, Altman E, Kozawa T, Hosokawa Y (2000) Braess-like paradoxes in distributed computer systems. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 45(9):1687–1691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kameda H, Li J, Kim C, Zhang Y (1997a) Optimal load balancing in distributed computer systems. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kameda H, Kozawa T, Li J (1997b). Anomalous relations among various performance objectives in distributed computer systems. In: Proc. 1st world congress on systems simulation. IEEE, pp 459–465

  • Keshav S (1997) An engineering approach to computer networking: ATM networks, the internet, and the telephone network. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim C, Kameda H (1990) An algorithm for optimal static load balancing in distributed computer systems. IEEE Trans Comput 41:381–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Koutsoupias E, Papadimitriou C (1999) Worst-case equilibria. In: Proceedings of the 16th annual symposium on theoretical aspects of computer science, pp 404–413

  • Legrand A, Touati C (2007) How to measure efficiency? In: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on game theory for communication networks (Game-Comm’07)

  • Orda A, Rom R, Shimkin N (1993) Competitive routing in multiuser communication networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 1:614–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadimitriou CH (2001) Algorithms, games and the internet. In: STOC. ACM Press, pp 749–753

  • Patriksson M (1994) The traffic assignment problem—models and methods. VSP, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Patriksson M (2004) Algorithms for computing traffic equilibria. Network Spatial Econ 4(1):23–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden T (2005) Selfish routing and the price of anarchy. MIT, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden T (2006a) On the severity of Braess’s paradox: designing networks for selfish users is hard. J Comput Syst Sci 72(5):922–953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden T (2006b) Selfish routing and the price of anarchy. In: OPTIMA

  • Roughgarden T, Tardos É (2004) A stronger bound on Braess’s paradox. In: Proceedings of the 15th annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithm, pp 333–334

  • Shao H, Lam WHK, Tam ML (2006) A reliability-based stochastic traffic assignment model for network with multiple user classes under uncertainty in demand. Network Spatial Econ 6(3-4):173–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens WR (1994) TCP/IP illustrated. In: The Protocols, vol 1. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  • Tantawi AN, Towsley D (1985) Optimal static load balancing in distributed computer systems. J ACM 32(2):445–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Y, Kameda H, Shimizu K (1992) Parametric analysis of optimal load balancing in distributed computer systems. J Inf Process (Info Proc Soc Japan) 14(4):433–441

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Laura Wynter for the discussions on this paper. This study was supported in part by the University of Tsukuba Research Projects and in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hisao Kameda.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kameda, H. Coincident Cost Improvement vs. Degradation by Adding Connections to Noncooperative Networks and Distributed Systems. Netw Spat Econ 9, 269–287 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-009-9102-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-009-9102-2

Keywords

Navigation