WINE 2008: Internet and Network Economics pp 251-262

Computational Aspects of a 2-Player Stackelberg Shortest Paths Tree Game

• Davide Bilò
• Luciano Gualà
• Guido Proietti
• Peter Widmayer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5385)

Abstract

Let a communication network be modelled by a directed graph G = (V,E) of n nodes and m edges. We consider a one-round two-player network pricing game, the Stackelberg Shortest Paths Tree (StackSPT) game. This is played on G, by assuming that edges in E are partitioned into two sets: a set E F of edges with a fixed positive real weight, and a set E P of edges that should be priced by one of the two players (the leader). Given a distinguished node r ∈ V, the StackSPT game is then as follows: the leader prices the edges in E P in such a way that he will maximize his revenue, knowing that the other player (the follower) will build a shortest paths tree of G rooted at r, say S(r), by running a publicly available algorithm. Quite naturally, for each edge selected in the solution, the leader’s revenue is assumed to be equal to the loaded price of an edge, namely the product of the edge price times the number of paths from r in S(r) that use it. First, we show that the problem of maximizing the leader’s revenue is NP-hard as soon as |E P | = Θ(n). Then, in search of an effective method for solving the problem when the size of E P is constant, we focus on the basic case in which |E P | = 2, and we provide an efficient O(n 2 logn) time algorithm. Afterwards, we generalize the approach to the case |E P | = k, and we show that it can be solved in polynomial time whenever k = O(1).

Keywords

Communication Networks Shortest Paths Tree Stackelberg Games Network Pricing Games

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

1. 1.
Agarwal, P.K., Erickson, J.: Geometric range searching and its relatives. In: Chazelle, B., Goodman, J.E., Pollack, R. (eds.) Advances in Discrete and Computational Geometry. Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 23, pp. 1–56. American Mathematical Society Press, Providence (1999)Google Scholar
2. 2.
Briest, P., Hoefer, M., Krysta, P.: Stackelberg network pricing games. In: 25th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS), pp. 133–142 (2008), http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2008/1340
3. 3.
Cardinal, J., Demaine, E.D., Fiorini, S., Joret, G., Langerman, S., Newman, I., Weimann, O.: The Stackelberg minimum spanning tree game. In: Dehne, F., Sack, J.-R., Zeh, N. (eds.) WADS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4619, pp. 64–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
4. 4.
Cormen, T.H., Leiserson, C.E., Rivest, R.L., Stein, C.: Introduction to Algorithms. MIT Press and McGraw-Hill (2001)Google Scholar
5. 5.
Grigoriev, A., van Hoesel, S., van der Kraaij, A., Uetz, M., Bouhtou, M.: Pricing network edges to cross a river. In: Persiano, G., Solis-Oba, R. (eds.) WAOA 2004. LNCS, vol. 3351, pp. 140–153. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
6. 6.
Labbé, M., Marcotte, P., Savard, G.: A bilevel model of taxation and its application to optimal highway pricing. Management Science 44(12), 608–622 (1998)
7. 7.
Malik, K., Mittal, A.K., Gupta, S.K.: The k most vital arcs in the shortest path problem. Oper. Res. Letters 8, 223–227 (1989)
8. 8.
Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T., Tardos, E., Vazirani, V.V. (eds.): Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
9. 9.
Roch, S., Savard, G., Marcotte, P.: An approximation algorithm for Stackelberg network pricing. Networks 46(1), 57–67 (2005)
10. 10.
van Hoesel, S.: An overview of Stackelberg pricing in networks. European Journal of Operational Research 189(3), 1393–1402 (2008)
11. 11.
von Stackelberg, H.: Marktform und Gleichgewicht (Market and Equilibrium). Verlag von Julius Springer, Vienna, Austria (1934)Google Scholar

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

• Davide Bilò
• 1
• Luciano Gualà
• 2
• Guido Proietti
• 3
• 4
• Peter Widmayer
• 1
1. 1.Institut für Theoretische Informatik, ETHZürichSwitzerland
2. 2.Dipartimento di MatematicaUniversità di Tor VergataRomaItaly
3. 3.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità di L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly
4. 4.Istituto di Analisi dei Sistemi ed Informatica, CNRRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations

Citepaper 