IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v336y2024i3d10.1007_s10479-023-05231-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A game theoretic framework for distributed computing with dynamic set of agents

Author

Listed:
  • Swapnil Dhamal

    (Institut Polytechnique de Paris)

  • Walid Ben-Ameur

    (Institut Polytechnique de Paris)

  • Tijani Chahed

    (Institut Polytechnique de Paris)

  • Eitan Altman

    (INRIA Sophia Antipolis Méditerranée
    LIA, Avignon University)

  • Albert Sunny

    (Indian Institute of Technology, Palakkad)

  • Sudheer Poojary

    (Qualcomm India Pvt. Ltd.)

Abstract

We consider a distributed computing setting wherein a central entity seeks power from computational providers by offering a certain reward in return. The computational providers are classified into long-term stakeholders that invest a constant amount of power over time and players that can strategize on their computational investment. In this paper, we model and analyze a stochastic game in such a distributed computing setting, wherein players arrive and depart over time. While our model is formulated with a focus on volunteer computing, it equally applies to certain other distributed computing applications such as mining in blockchain. We prove that, in Markov perfect equilibrium, only players with cost parameters in a relatively low range which collectively satisfy a certain constraint in a given state, invest. We infer that players need not have knowledge about the system state and other players’ parameters, if the total power that is being received by the central entity is communicated to the players as part of the system’s protocol. If players are homogeneous and the system consists of a reasonably large number of players, we observe that the total power received by the central entity is proportional to the offered reward and does not vary significantly despite the players’ arrivals and departures, thus resulting in a robust and reliable system. We then study by way of simulations and mean field approximation, how the players’ utilities are influenced by their arrival and departure rates as well as the system parameters such as the reward’s amount and dispensing rate. We observe that the players’ expected utilities are maximized when their arrival and departure rates are such that the average number of players present in the system is typically between 1 and 2, since this leads to the system being in the condition of least competition with high probability. Further, their expected utilities increase almost linearly with the offered reward and converge to a constant value with respect to its dispensing rate. We conclude by studying a Stackelberg game, where the central entity decides the amount of reward to offer, and the computational providers decide how much power to invest based on the offered reward.

Suggested Citation

  • Swapnil Dhamal & Walid Ben-Ameur & Tijani Chahed & Eitan Altman & Albert Sunny & Sudheer Poojary, 2024. "A game theoretic framework for distributed computing with dynamic set of agents," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 336(3), pages 1871-1904, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:336:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10479-023-05231-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-023-05231-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-023-05231-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-023-05231-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eitan Altman & Nahum Shimkin, 1998. "Individual Equilibrium and Learning in Processor Sharing Systems," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 776-784, December.
    2. Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 2001. "Markov Perfect Equilibrium: I. Observable Actions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 100(2), pages 191-219, October.
    3. Bruno Biais & Christophe Bisière & Matthieu Bouvard & Catherine Casamatta, 2019. "The Blockchain Folk Theorem," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(5), pages 1662-1715.
    4. Refael Hassin & Moshe Haviv, 2002. "Nash Equilibrium and Subgame Perfection in Observable Queues," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 15-26, July.
    5. Wang, Jinting & Zhang, Feng, 2013. "Strategic joining in M/M/1 retrial queues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(1), pages 76-87.
    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. Wang, Jinting & Zhang, Feng, 2013. "Strategic joining in M/M/1 retrial queues," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(1), pages 76-87.
    2. Refael Hassin, 2022. "Profit maximization and cost balancing in queueing systems," Queueing Systems: Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 100(3), pages 429-431, April.
    3. Abito, Jose Miguel & Chen, Cuicui, 2023. "A partial identification framework for dynamic games," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    4. Martin, Fernando M., 2015. "Debt, inflation and central bank independence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 129-150.
    5. Hanna Halaburda & Guillaume Haeringer & Joshua Gans & Neil Gandal, 2022. "The Microeconomics of Cryptocurrencies," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 971-1013, September.
    6. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2010. "Quality, Upgrades, and Equilibrium in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 10-36, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    7. Robert Akerlof & Hongyi Li & Jonathan Yeo, 2022. "Ruling the Roost: The Vicious Circle and the Emergence of Pecking Order," Discussion Papers 2023-03, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    8. Simplice A. Asongu & Nicholas M. Odhiambo, 2023. "Female unemployment, mobile money innovations and doing business by females," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    9. Piotr Więcek & Eitan Altman & Arnob Ghosh, 2016. "Mean-Field Game Approach to Admission Control of an M/M/ $$\infty $$ ∞ Queue with Shared Service Cost," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 538-566, December.
    10. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2007. "Quality Upgrades and the (loss) of Market Power in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 18, Portuguese Competition Authority.
    11. Lin William Cong & Zhiguo He & Jiasun Li & Wei Jiang, 2021. "Decentralized Mining in Centralized Pools [Concentrating on the fall of the labor share]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(3), pages 1191-1235.
    12. Marco Lambrecht & Andis Sofianos & Yilong Xu, 2025. "Does Mining Fuel Bubbles? An Experimental Study on Cryptocurrency Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(3), pages 1865-1888, March.
    13. Joao Macieira, 2010. "Oblivious Equilibrium in Dynamic Discrete Games," 2010 Meeting Papers 680, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Kranz, Sebastian, 2013. "Relational Contracting, Repeated Negotiations, and Hold-Up," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 80047, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Parlakturk, Ali & Kumar, Sunil, 2004. "Self-Interested Routing in Queueing Networks," Research Papers 1782r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    16. Jayakumar Subramanian & Amit Sinha & Aditya Mahajan, 2023. "Robustness and Sample Complexity of Model-Based MARL for General-Sum Markov Games," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 56-88, March.
    17. Nunnari, Salvatore, 2021. "Dynamic legislative bargaining with veto power: Theory and experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 186-230.
    18. Michael Woodford, 2013. "Macroeconomic Analysis Without the Rational Expectations Hypothesis," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 303-346, May.
    19. Susanne Goldlücke & Sebastian Kranz, 2018. "Discounted stochastic games with voluntary transfers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 66(1), pages 235-263, July.
    20. Luca Colombo & Paola Labrecciosa & Agnieszka Rusinowska, 2025. "A dynamic analysis of criminal networks," Post-Print hal-04850675, HAL.

    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:spr:annopr:v:336:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10479-023-05231-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.