IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intdis/v12y2016i9p1550147716668073.html

A Variable bandwidth spectrum auction mechanism with performance guarantee

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaofei Bu
  • Yu-E Sun
  • Lina Zhang
  • He Huang
  • Baowei Wang

Abstract

Spectrum resource is experiencing a rapid growth, which cannot meet the demand of the ever-increasing wireless communications technologies in recent years. Spectrum auctions in the secondary market have been considered as a prominent way to solve this challenge due to its fairness and effectiveness. However, most of the existing studies mainly focus on allocating spectrum in units of channels without considering allocate spectrum with variable bandwidths to the secondary users, which has been supported by the software-defined radio technologies. Variable bandwidth trading can make the usage of spectrum more flexible and efficient. Thus, we study the spectrum auction problem where the primary user wants to share a continuous spectrum with the secondary users, and each secondary user has a fixed transmission demand. The target of this work is to design a truthful auction mechanism, which can allocate spectrum with variable bandwidths to the secondary users and maximize the social efficiency at the same time. We first propose a bid-monotone winner determination mechanism to decide the winning secondary users in the auction. Since the optimal winner determination problem is NP-hard, we prove that the proposed mechanism has an approximation factor of 10. Then, a channel allocation mechanism is proposed, which can allocate spectrum to winners without interference. Finally, we compute the critical value for each winner to ensure truthfulness. We can demonstrate that the proposed auction mechanism is truthful through theoretical analysis. We also perform extensive simulations to study the performance of the proposed auction mechanism, and the simulation results corroborate our theoretical analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaofei Bu & Yu-E Sun & Lina Zhang & He Huang & Baowei Wang, 2016. "A Variable bandwidth spectrum auction mechanism with performance guarantee," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 12(9), pages 15501477166, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intdis:v:12:y:2016:i:9:p:1550147716668073
    DOI: 10.1177/1550147716668073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1550147716668073
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1550147716668073?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    2. McAfee, R. Preston, 1992. "A dominant strategy double auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 434-450, April.
    3. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    4. Edward Clarke, 1971. "Multipart pricing of public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 17-33, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alexander Braun & Thomas Kesselheim, 2023. "Truthful Mechanisms for Two-Sided Markets via Prophet Inequalities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 1959-1986, November.
    2. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    3. Delacrétaz, David & Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M. & Wilkening, Tom, 2019. "Two-sided allocation problems, decomposability, and the impossibility of efficient trade," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 416-454.
    4. Jiayin Liu & Chenglong Zhang, 2025. "Deep Learning for Double Auction," Papers 2504.05355, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2025.
    5. Xiao, Haohan & Xu, Meng & Gao, Ziyou, 2018. "Shared parking problem: A novel truthful double auction mechanism approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 40-69.
    6. Siddharth Prasad & Maria-Florina Balcan & Tuomas Sandholm, 2025. "Revenue-Optimal Efficient Mechanism Design with General Type Spaces," Papers 2505.13687, arXiv.org.
    7. Scott Fay & Robert Zeithammer, 2017. "Bidding for Bidders? How the Format for Soliciting Supplier Participation in NYOP Auctions Impacts Channel Profit," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4324-4344, December.
    8. Tafreshian, Amirmahdi & Masoud, Neda, 2022. "A truthful subsidy scheme for a peer-to-peer ridesharing market with incomplete information," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 130-161.
    9. Dütting, Paul & Talgam-Cohen, Inbal & Roughgarden, Tim, 2017. "Modularity and greed in double auctions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 83199, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Song, Yangwei, 2018. "Efficient Implementation with Interdependent Valuations and Maxmin Agents," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 92, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    11. Jesse A. Schwartz & Quan Wen, 2008. "A Revelation Principle for Dominant Strategy Implementation," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0819, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    12. Marek Pycia & Peter Troyan, 2023. "A Theory of Simplicity in Games and Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1495-1526, July.
    13. Philippe Jehiel & Laurent Lamy, 2018. "A Mechanism Design Approach to the Tiebout Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(2), pages 735-760.
    14. Corchón, Luis C., 2008. "The theory of implementation : what did we learn?," UC3M Working papers. Economics we081207, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    15. Yoon, Kiho, 2008. "The participatory Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 324-336, February.
    16. Debasis Mishra & Abdul Quadir, 2012. "Deterministic single object auctions with private values," Discussion Papers 12-06, Indian Statistical Institute, Delhi.
    17. Babaioff, Moshe & Nisan, Noam & Pavlov, Elan, 2009. "Mechanisms for a spatially distributed market," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 660-684, July.
    18. Tomoya Kazumura & Shigehiro Serizawa, 2016. "Efficiency and strategy-proofness in object assignment problems with multi-demand preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 633-663, October.
    19. Pathikrit Basu, 2023. "Optimal mechanism design with approximate incentive compatibility and many players," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 8(1), pages 97-106, December.
    20. Claude d'Aspremont & Jacques Crémer & Louis-André Gérard-Varet, 2003. "Correlation, independence, and Bayesian incentives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 21(2), pages 281-310, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:intdis:v:12:y:2016:i:9:p:1550147716668073. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.