A Simulation-Based Approach to Bidding Strategies for Network Resources in Competitive Wireless Networks
We introduce a simulation-based approach to the problem that mobile users may face in a multi-provider environment when seeking to satisfy their demand for bandwidth; if they are allowed to satisfy their individual demands by aggregating shares from two or more providers the problem becomes one of resource allocation in a competitive market. We use the Progressive Second-Price auction at each provider, exploring the properties of three bidding strategies. Simulations aim at learning whether the auction converges at each seller when bidders, either make coordinated or non-coordinated decisions among auctions, or complement already secured shares by bidding at other auctions. Aggregate measures of welfare and sellers’ revenue are obtained for each simulation run.
KeywordsMobile User Network Resource Valuation Function Bidding Strategy Bidding Behaviour
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Semret, N.: Market mechanisms for network resource sharing. PhD thesis, Columbia University, Center for Telecommunications Research (1999)Google Scholar
- 5.Krishna, V.: Auction theory. Academic Press, London (2004)Google Scholar
- 6.Maillé, P., Tuffin, B.: Multi-bid auctions for bandwidth allocation in communication networks. In: The proceedings of the 23rd IEEE Infocom Conference, Hong-Kong, China (2004)Google Scholar
- 7.Zeng, D., Cox, J., Dror, M.: Coordination of purchasing and bidding activities across markets. In: The proceedings of the 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2004)Google Scholar
- 8.Woolridge, M.J.: An introduction to multiagent systems. J. Wiley, New York (2002)Google Scholar
- 9.Roggendorf, M., Beltran, B., Gutierrez, J.: Architecture and implementation of an agent-based simulation tool for market-based pricing in next-generation wireless networks. In: The proceedings of TridentCOM 2006, 2nd International IEEE/Create-Net Conference on Testbeds, Barcelona, Spain, March 1–3 (2006)Google Scholar