• Documents
  • Authors
  • Tables
  • Log in
  • Sign up
  • MetaCart
  • DMCA
  • Donate

CiteSeerX logo

Advanced Search Include Citations
Advanced Search Include Citations

DMCA

Winner determination in combinatorial auction generalizations (2002)

Cached

  • Download as a PDF

Download Links

  • [wireless.fcc.gov]
  • [www-2.cs.cmu.edu]
  • [www.cs.cmu.edu]
  • [www.cs.cmu.edu]
  • [www.cs.cmu.edu]
  • [www.cs.cmu.edu]
  • [siesta.cs.wustl.edu]
  • [www.cs.ucsb.edu]

  • Other Repositories/Bibliography

  • DBLP
  • Save to List
  • Add to Collection
  • Correct Errors
  • Monitor Changes
by Tuomas Sandholm
Citations:175 - 23 self
  • Summary
  • Citations
  • Active Bibliography
  • Co-citation
  • Clustered Documents
  • Version History

BibTeX

@INPROCEEDINGS{Sandholm02winnerdetermination,
    author = {Tuomas Sandholm},
    title = {Winner determination in combinatorial auction generalizations},
    booktitle = {},
    year = {2002},
    pages = {69--76}
}

Share

Facebook Twitter Reddit Bibsonomy

OpenURL

 

Abstract

Combinatorial markets where bids can be submitted on bundles of items can be economically desirable coordination mechanisms in multiagent systems where the items exhibit complementarity and substitutability. There has been a surge of recent research on winner determination in combinatorial auctions. In this paper we study a wider range of combinatorial market designs: auctions, reverse auctions, and exchanges, with one or multiple units of each item, with and without free disposal. We first theoretically characterize the complexity. The most interesting results are that reverse auctions with free disposal can be approximated, and in all of the cases without free disposal, even finding a feasible solution is ÆÈ-complete. We then ran experiments on known benchmarks as well as ones which we introduced, to study the complexity of the market variants in practice. Cases with free disposal tended to be easier than ones without. On many distributions, reverse auctions with free disposal were easier than auctions with free disposal— as the approximability would suggest—but interestingly, on one of the most realistic distributions they were harder. Single-unit exchanges were easy, but multi-unit exchanges were extremely hard. 1

Keyphrases

free disposal    winner determination    combinatorial auction generalization    reverse auction    multi-unit exchange    interesting result    combinatorial market design    recent research    desirable coordination mechanism    multiagent system    multiple unit    wider range    combinatorial auction    market variant    combinatorial market    single-unit exchange    many distribution    realistic distribution    feasible solution    known benchmark   

Powered by: Apache Solr
  • About CiteSeerX
  • Submit and Index Documents
  • Privacy Policy
  • Help
  • Data
  • Source
  • Contact Us

Developed at and hosted by The College of Information Sciences and Technology

© 2007-2019 The Pennsylvania State University