Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load Balancing

In load balancing problems there is a set of clients, each wishing to select a resource from a set of permissible ones, in order to execute a certain task. Each resource has a latency function, which depends on its workload, and a client's cost is the completion time of her chosen resource. Two fundamental variants of load balancing problems are {\em selfish load balancing} (aka. {\em load balancing games}), where clients are non-cooperative selfish players aimed at minimizing their own cost solely, and {\em online load balancing}, where clients appear online and have to be irrevocably assigned to a resource without any knowledge about future requests. We revisit both selfish and online load balancing under the objective of minimizing the {\em Nash Social Welfare}, i.e., the geometric mean of the clients' costs. To the best of our knowledge, despite being a celebrated welfare estimator in many social contexts, the Nash Social Welfare has not been considered so far as a benchmarking quality measure in load balancing problems. We provide tight bounds on the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria and on the competitive ratio of the greedy algorithm under very general latency functions, including polynomial ones. For this particular class, we also prove that the greedy strategy is optimal as it matches the performance of any possible online algorithm

Nash Social Welfare in Selfish and Online Load Balancing (Short Paper)

In load balancing problems there is a set of clients, each wishing to select a resource from a set of permissible ones, in order to execute a certain task. Each resource has a latency function, which depends on its workload, and a client's cost is the completion time of her chosen resource. Two fundamental variants of load balancing problems are selfish load balancing (aka. load balancing games), where clients are non-cooperative selfish players aimed at minimizing their own cost solely, and online load balancing, where clients appear online and have to be irrevocably assigned to a resource without any knowledge about future requests. We revisit both problems under the objective of minimizing the Nash Social Welfare, i.e., the geometric mean of the clients' costs. To the best of our knowledge, despite being a celebrated welfare estimator in many social contexts, the Nash Social Welfare has not been considered so far as a benchmarking quality measure in load balancing problems. We provide tight bounds on the price of anarchy of pure Nash equilibria and on the competitive ratio of the greedy algorithm under very general latency functions, including polynomial ones. For this particular class, we also prove that the greedy strategy is optimal, as it matches the performance of any possible online algorithm

Unilateral Altruism in Network Routing Games with Atomic Players

We study a routing game in which one of the players unilaterally acts altruistically by taking into consideration the latency cost of other players as well as his own. By not playing selfishly, a player can not only improve the other players' equilibrium utility but also improve his own equilibrium utility. To quantify the effect, we define a metric called the Value of Unilateral Altruism (VoU) to be the ratio of the equilibrium utility of the altruistic user to the equilibrium utility he would have received in Nash equilibrium if he were selfish. We show by example that the VoU, in a game with nonlinear latency functions and atomic players, can be arbitrarily large. Since the Nash equilibrium social welfare of this example is arbitrarily far from social optimum, this example also has a Price of Anarchy (PoA) that is unbounded. The example is driven by there being a small number of players since the same example with non-atomic players yields a Nash equilibrium that is fully efficient

On Linear Congestion Games with Altruistic Social Context

We study the issues of existence and inefficiency of pure Nash equilibria in linear congestion games with altruistic social context, in the spirit of the model recently proposed by de Keijzer {\em et al.} \cite{DSAB13}. In such a framework, given a real matrix $\Gamma=(\gamma_{ij})$ specifying a particular social context, each player $i$ aims at optimizing a linear combination of the payoffs of all the players in the game, where, for each player $j$, the multiplicative coefficient is given by the value $\gamma_{ij}$. We give a broad characterization of the social contexts for which pure Nash equilibria are always guaranteed to exist and provide tight or almost tight bounds on their prices of anarchy and stability. In some of the considered cases, our achievements either improve or extend results previously known in the literature

Selfish Bin Covering

In this paper, we address the selfish bin covering problem, which is greatly related both to the bin covering problem, and to the weighted majority game. What we mainly concern is how much the lack of coordination harms the social welfare. Besides the standard PoA and PoS, which are based on Nash equilibrium, we also take into account the strong Nash equilibrium, and several other new equilibria. For each equilibrium, the corresponding PoA and PoS are given, and the problems of computing an arbitrary equilibrium, as well as approximating the best one, are also considered.Comment: 16 page

Load Balancing for Dynamic Clients, Game Theory Approach

We address the problem of load balancing which is considered as a technique to spread work between two or more computers in order to get optimal response time and resource utilization between servers by using Nash equilibrium which is the central concern of game theory. We use a normal form table to express the payoff for every client, every client has estimate time for execution and every server has speed, from these facts, we innovate a dynamic payoff matrix to evaluate a Nash equilibrium point and then determine which server can serve an appropriate client to achieve best load balancing which is called "server matching" (Each client is matched to exactly one server, but a server can be matched to multiple clients or none.). We use Netlogo simulation to implement this matching, besides a useful game theory oolset called GAMBIT (Gambit toolset homepage, 2005) to solve the payoff matrix and compute Nash equilibrium point. This paper was done between the years 2007 – 2009, and to know what was done in this paper we can argue that we contribute in accomplishing the load balancing between servers, using new technique depends on game theory perspective, for that reason we can answer the question why this thesis was done, because it is very vital in achieving this goal. We use in our thesis a simulation methodology to prove the results that we have obtained from the simulation program which is a Netlogo V4.0.2, and we compare the results with traditionally techniques in load balancing. Finally, the results show that we improve the performance for the whole system by 4% in achieving load balancing and overweight the possibilities of using this technique in real system around the world