Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Automated bidding in computational markets: an application in market-based allocation of computing services

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Autonomous agents are widely applied to automate interactions in robotics, e.g. for selling and purchasing goods on eBay, and in financial markets, e.g. in the form of quote machines and algorithmic traders. Current research investigates efficient economic mechanisms that fully automate the provisioning and usage processes of Grid-based services. On the one hand, consumers want to allocate resources on demand for their various applications, e.g. data sharing, stream processing, email, business applications and simulations. On the other hand, providers of Grid services want to govern business policies to meet their utilization and profit goals. The above-mentioned processes are not manually manageable, however, because decisions need to be taken within milliseconds. Therefore, such processes have to be automated to minimize human interactions. Hence, market mechanisms and strategic behavior play important roles when it comes to achieving automated and efficient allocation of Grid services. The paper begins by presenting a framework for automated bidding, providing a methodology for the design and implementation of configurable bidding strategies. Second, it presents a novel bidding strategy based on a reinforcement learning technique. This strategy is designed to automate the bid generation processes of consumers and providers in various market mechanisms. Third, the behavior and convergence of the strategy is evaluated in a centralized Continuous Double Auction and a decentralized on-line machine scheduling mechanism against selected benchmark bidding strategies. Fourth, we define a bidding language for communicating consumer and provider preferences to the market as well as report back the match of the market-based allocation process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ågotnes T., van der Hoek W., & Wooldridge M. (2009) Reasoning about coalitional games. Artificial Intelligence 173(1): 45–79

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Andreozzi, S., Burke, S., Ehm, F., Field, L., Galang, G., Konya, B., et al. (2008). GLUE specification v. 2.0. GLUE WG, Open Grid Forum.

  3. Andrieux, A., Czajkowski, K., Dan, A., Keahey, K., Ludwig, H., Nakata, T., et al. (2007). Web services agreement specification (WS-agreement), Open Grid Forum.

  4. Anjomshoaa, A., Brisard, F., Drescher, M., Fellows, D., Ly, A., McGough, S., et al. (2005). Job submission description language (JSDL) Specification, Version 1.0, Open Grid Forum.

  5. Anthony P., Jennings N. (2003) Developing a bidding agent for multiple heterogeneous auctions. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT) 3(3): 185–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bapna, R., Das, S., Garfinkel, R., & Stallaert, J. (2005). A market design for grid computing. Technical report. USA: Department of Operations and Information Management, University of Connecticut.

  7. Bergenti, F., & Poggi, A. (2002). LEAP: A FIPA platform for handheld and mobile devices. LNCS, 2333, 436–446.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Borissov, N. (2009). Q-strategy: Automated bidding and convergence in computational markets. In Twenty-first Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (IAAI) Conference.

  9. Borissov, N., & Wirström, N. (2008). Q-Strategy: A bidding strategy for market-based allocation of grid services. In OTM Conferences (1) (pp. 744–761).

  10. Cliff, D. (1997). Minimal-intelligence agents for bargaining behaviors in market-based environments. TechnicalReport, New york: Hewlett Packard Labs.

  11. Das R., Hanson J., Kephart J., Tesauro G. (2001) Agent-human interactions in the continuous double auction. Artificial Intelligence 17: 1169–1178

    Google Scholar 

  12. DMTF. (2008). Common information model (CIM) v2.19.1. Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF). http://www.dmtf.org/standards/cim.

  13. Endriss U., Maudet N. (2004) Welfare engineering in multiagent systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3071: 93–106

    Google Scholar 

  14. Even-Dar E., Mansour Y. (2004) Learning rates for Q-learning. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 5: 1–25

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Even-Dar E., Mannor S., Mansour Y. (2006) Action elimination and stopping conditions for the multi-armed bandit and reinforcement learning problems. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 7: 1079–1105

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Fasli M., Michalakopoulos M. (2008) e-Game: A platform for developing auction-based market simulations. Decision Support Systems 44(2): 469–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fatima S., Wooldridge M., Jennings N. (2006) Multi-issue negotiation with deadlines. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 27: 381–417

    MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Feitelson, D. (2009). Parallel workloads archive. http://www.cs.huji.ac.il/labs/parallel/workload.

  19. FIPA, T. (2002). Fipa abstract architecture specification. Tech. rep., Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agents.

  20. Foster, I., Zhao, Y., Raicu, I., & Lu, S. (2008). Cloud Computing and Grid Computing 360-Degree Compared. Grid Computing Environments Workshop (pp. 1–10).

  21. Friedman-Hill, E.-J. (2003). Jess, the rule engine for the java platform. Livermore, CA: Distributed Computing Systems, Sandia National Laboratories.

  22. Gjerstad S., Dickhaut J. (1998) Price formation in double auctions. Games and Economic Behavior 22(1): 1–29

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Gode D., Sunder S. (1993) Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: Market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. The Journal of Political Economy 101(1): 119–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gomes, E., & Kowalczyk, R. (2007). Learning in market-based resource allocation. 6th IEEE/ACIS Int Conference on Computer and Information Science (pp. 475–482).

  25. Green P., Rao V. (1971) Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data. Journal of Marketing Research 8(3): 355–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Grosu, D., & Das, A. (2006). Auctioning resources in grids:model and protocols. Concurrency and Computation, 18(15), 1927.

  27. Helsinger, A., Thome, M., Wright, T., Technol, B., & Cambridge, M. (2004). Cougaar: A scalable, distributed multi-agent architecture. IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 2.

  28. Heydenreich B., Müller R., Uetz M. (2006) Decentralization and mechanism design for online machine scheduling. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4059: 136–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Howden, N., Ronnquist, R., Hodgson, A., & Lucas, A. (2001). JACK intelligent agents-summary of an agent infrastructure. 5th Int Conference on Autonomous Agents.

  30. Iyer K., Huhns M.N. (2009) Negotiation criteria for multiagent resource allocation. Knowledge Engineering Review 24(2): 111–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaelbling, L., Littman, M., & Moore, A. (1996). Reinforcement learning: A survey. Arxiv preprint csAI/9605103.

  32. Lai K., Rasmusson L., Adar E., Zhang L., Huberman B. (2005) Tycoon: An implementation of a distributed, market-based resource allocation system. Multiagent and Grid Systems 1(3): 169–182

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Li, J., & Yahyapour, R. (2006). Learning-based negotiation strategies for grid scheduling. Int Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID2006) (pp. 576–583).

  34. Luce R., Tukey J. (1964) Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1(1): 1–27

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. Macías, M., Rana, O., Smith, G., Guitart, J., & Torres, J. (2008). Maximizing revenue in grid markets using an economically enhanced resource manager. Concurrency and computation: Practice and experience. doi:10.1002/cpe.1370.

  36. Medernach, E. (2005). Workload analysis of a cluster in a grid environment. LNCS, 3834, 36–61.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Milano M., Roli A. (2004) MAGMA: A multiagent architecture for metaheuristics. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics 34(2): 925–941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Milojicic D. et al (1998) MASIF: The OMG mobile agent system interoperability facility. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 2: 117–129

    Google Scholar 

  39. Myerson R., Satterthwaite M. (1983) Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading. Journal of Economic Theory 29(2): 265–281

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  40. Nassif, L., Nogueira, J., & de Andrade, F. (2007). Distributed resource selection in grid using decision theory. 7th IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (pp. 327–334).

  41. Nimis, J., et al. (2009). D2.2a: Final specification and design documentation of the sorma components f́b revised version. Tech. rep. http://www.im.uni-karlsruhe.de/sorma/fileadmin/SORMA_Deliverables/D2.2a_final.pdf.

  42. Nisan N. (2004). Bidding languages. USA: Combinatorial Auctions MIT Press.

  43. Pardoe, D., & Stone, P. (2009). An autonomous agent for supply chain management. In G. Adomavicius & A. Gupta (Eds.), Handbooks in information systems series: Business computing. Elsevier, Emerald Group.

  44. Parkes, D., Singh, S., & Yanovsky, D. (2004). Approximately efficient online mechanism design. Proc 18th Annual Conf on Neural Information Processing Systems.

  45. Paurobally, S., Tamma, V., & Wooldridge, M. (2007). A framework for web service negotiation. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS), 2(4), 14.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Poslad, S., Laamanen, H., Malaka, R., Nick, A., Buckle, P., & Zipf, A. (2001). CRUMPET: Creation of user-friendly mobile services personalised for tourism. IEE Conference Publication (pp. 28–32).

  47. Reeves D., Wellman M., MacKie-Mason J., Osepayshvili A. (2005) Exploring bidding strategies for market-based scheduling. Decision Support Systems 39(1): 67–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Robles, S., Borrell, J., Bigham, J., Tokarchuk, L., & Cuthbert, L. (2001). Design of a trust model for a secure multi-agent marketplace. Proceedings of the 5th international conference on autonomous agents (pp. 77–78).

  49. Rosenschein J., Zlotkin G. (1994) Rules of encounter: Designing conventions for automated negotiation among computers. MIT Press, USA

    Google Scholar 

  50. Rothkopf M. (2007) Thirteen reasons why the Vickrey-Clarke-Groves process is not practical. Operations Research 55(2): 191–197

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Saaty T. (1986) Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process. Management Science 32(7): 841–855

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  52. Sandholm, T., Lai, K., & Clearwater, S. (2008). Admission control in a computational market. Proceedings of the 2008 Eighth IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID) (pp. 277–286).

  53. Satterthwaite M., Williams S. (1989) Bilateral trade with the sealed bid k-double auction: Existence and efficiency. Journal of Economic Theory 48: 107–133

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  54. Schnizler B., Neumann D., Veit D., Weinhardt C. (2006) Trading grid services-a multi-attribute combinatorial approach. European Journal of Operational Research 187: 943–961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Shehory, O., & Sturm, A. (2001). Evaluation of modeling techniques for agent-based systems. Proceedings of the 5th international conference on autonomous agents (pp. 624–631).

  56. Sherstov A., Stone P. (2005) Three automated stock-trading agents: A comparative study. LNCS 3435: 173

    Google Scholar 

  57. Sun R., Peterson T. (1999) Multi-agent reinforcement learning: weighting and partitioning. Neural Networks 12(4–5): 727–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Vytelingum P., Cliff D., Jennings N. (2008) Strategic bidding in continuous double auctions. Artificial Intelligence 172: 1700–1729

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Watkins C., Dayan P. (1992) Q-learning. Machine Learning 8(3): 279–292

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  60. Wellman M., Walsh W., Wurman P., MacKie-Mason J. (2001) Auction protocols for decentralized scheduling. Games and Economic Behavior 35(1–2): 271–303

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  61. Wellman M., Greenwald A., Stone P. (2007) Autonomous bidding agents: Strategies and lessons from the trading agent competition. MIT Press, USA

    Google Scholar 

  62. Whiteson S., Stone P. (2006) Evolutionary function approximation for reinforcement learning. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 7: 877–917

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  63. Wolski, R., Plank, J., Brevik, J., & Bryan, T. (2001). Analyzing market-based resource allocation strategies for the computational grid. International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications, 15, 258.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wurman, P., Wellman, M., & Walsh, W. (1998). The michigan internet auctionbot: A configurable auction server for human and software agents. Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Autonomous agents (pp. 301–308).

  65. Wurman P., Wellman M., Walsh W. (2001) A parameterization of the auction design space. Games and Economic Behavior 35(1–2): 304–338

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  66. Yeo C., Buyya R. (2006) A taxonomy of market-based resource management systems for utility-driven cluster computing. Software:Practice and Experience 36(13): 1381–1419

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Systems and Management, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Kaiserstr. 12, 76131, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Nikolay Borissov & Christof Weinhardt

  2. Chair of Information Systems Research, University of Freiburg, Platz der Alten Synagoge, 79085, Freiburg, Germany

    Dirk Neumann

Authors
  1. Nikolay Borissov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dirk Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christof Weinhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolay Borissov.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Borissov, N., Neumann, D. & Weinhardt, C. Automated bidding in computational markets: an application in market-based allocation of computing services. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 21, 115–142 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9112-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9112-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation