Competitive Auctions for Multiple Digital Goods

  • Andrew V. Goldberg
  • Jason D. Hartline
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2161)

Abstract

Competitive auctions encourage consumers to bid their utility values while achieving revenue close to that of fixed pricing with perfect market analysis. These auctions were introduced in [6] in the context of selling an unlimited number of copies of a single item (e.g., rights to watch a movie broadcast). In this paper we study the case of multiple items (e.g., concurrent broadcast of several movies). We show auctions that are competitive for this case. The underlying auction mechanisms are more sophisticated than in the single item case, and require solving an interesting optimization problem. Our results are based on a sampling problem that may have other applications.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  1. 1.
    A. Borodin and R. El-Yaniv. Online Computation and Competitive Analysis. Cambridge University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Chernoff. A Measure of Asymptotic Efficiency for Test of a Hypothesis Based on the Sum of Observations. Anals of Math. Stat., 23:493–509, 1952.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. H. Clarke. Multipart Pricing of Public Goods. Public Choice, 11:17–33, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Edmonds and E. L. Johnson. Matching, a Well-Solved Class of Integer Linear Programs. In R. Guy, H. Haneni, and J. Schönhein, editors, Combinatorial Structures and Their Applications, pages 89–92. Gordon and Breach, NY, 1970.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Feigenbaum, C. Papadimitriou, and S. Shenker. Sharing the Cost of Multicast Transmissions. In Proc. of 32nd Symposium Theory of Computing, pages 218–226. ACM Press, New York, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. V. Goldberg, J. D. Hartline, and A. Wright. Competitive auctions and digital goods. Technical Report STAR-TR-99.09.01, STAR Laboratory, InterTrust Tech. Corp., Santa Clara, CA, 1999. Available at URL http://www.star-lab.com/tr/tr-99-01.html.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. V. Goldberg, J. D. Hartline, and A. Wright. Competitive Auctions and Digital Goods. In Proc. 12th Symp. on Discrete Alg., pages 735–744. ACM/SIAM, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. Groves. Incentives in Teams. Econometrica, 41:617–631, 1973.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Lehmann, L. I. OĆallaghan, and Y. Shoham. Truth Revelation in Approximately Efficient Combinatorial Auctions. In Proc. of 1st ACM Conf. on E-Commerce, pages 96–102. ACM Press, New York, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. Linial. Game Theoretic Aspects of Computing. In Handbook of Game Theory, volume 2, pages 1339–1395. Elseveir Science Publishers B.V., 1994.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. Motwani and P. Raghavan. Randomized Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    N. Nisan and A. Ronen. Algorithmic Mechanism Design. In Proc. of 31st Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 129–140. ACM Press, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. E. Roth and M. A. Oliveira Sotomayor. Two-Sided Matching: A Study in Game-Theoretic Modeling and Analysis. Cambridge University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. S. Shapley. Core of Convex Games. Int. J. of Game Theory, 1:11–26, 1971.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    L. S. Shapley and M. Shubik. The Assignment Game I: The Core. Int. J. of Game Theory, 1:111–130, 1972.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. D. Sleator and R. E. Tarjan. Amortized Efficiency of List Update and Paging Rules. Communications of the ACM, 28:202–208, 1985.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Vickrey. Counterspeculation, Auctions, and Competitive Sealed Tenders. J. of Finance, 16:8–37, 1961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew V. Goldberg
    • 1
  • Jason D. Hartline
    • 2
  1. 1.STAR LaboratoryInterTrust Technologies Corp.Santa ClaraUSA
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentUniversity of WashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations