Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Local Search Methods for the Optimal Winner Determination Problem in Combinatorial Auctions

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Algorithms

Abstract

In this paper, both stochastic local search (SLS) and tabu search (TS) are studied for the optimal winner determination problem (WDP) in combinatorial auctions. The proposed methods are evaluated on various benchmark problems, and compared with the hybrid simulated annealing (SAGII), the memetic algorithms (MA) and Casanova. The computational experiments show that the SLS provides competitive results and finds solutions of a higher quality than TS and Casanova methods.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersson, A., Tenhunen, M., Ygge, F.: Integer programming for combinatorial auction winner determination. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, pp. 39–46. IEEE Computer Society, July 2000

  2. Bean, J.C.: Genetics and random keys for sequencing and optimization. ORSA J. Comput. 6(2), 154–160 (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Boughaci, D., Drias, H., Benhamou, B.: Stochastic local search for the optimal winner determination problem in combinatorial auctions. In: The International Conference on Constraint Programming, CP 2008. LNCS, pp. 593–597 (2008)

  4. Boughaci, D., Drias, H., Benhamou, B.: A memetic algorithm for the optimal winner determination problem. In: Soft Computing—a Fusion of Foundations, Methodologies and Applications, vol. 13, no. 8–9, pp. 905–917. Springer, Berlin (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fujishima, Y., Leyton-Brown, K., Shoham, Y.: Taming the computational complexity of combinatorial auctions: optimal and approximate approaches. In: Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 48–53 (1999)

  6. Glover, F.: Future paths for integer programming and links to artificial intelligence. Comput. Oper. Res. 13, 533–549 (1986)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Glover, F.: Tabu search: part I. ORSA J. Comput. 1(3):190–206 (1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Guo, Y., Lim, A., Rodrigues, B., Zhu, Y.: Heuristics for a brokering set packing problem. In: Proceedings of eighth international symposium on artificial intelligence and mathematics, pp. 10–14 (2004)

  9. Guo, Y., Lim, A., Rodrigues, B., Zhu, Y.: Heuristics for a bidding problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 33(8), 2179–2188 (2006)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Holland, A., O’sullivan, B.: Towards fast Vickrey pricing using constraint programming. Artif. Intell. Rev. 21(3–4), 335–352 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Hoos, H.H., Boutilier, C.: Solving combinatorial auctions using stochastic local search. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 22–29 (2000)

  12. Hoos, H.H.: An adaptive noise mechanism for WalkSAT. In: Proceedings of the 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence AAAI/IAAI 2002, pp. 655–660 (2002)

  13. Lau, H.C., Goh, Y.G.: An intelligent brokering system to support multi-agent web-based 4th-party logistics. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 54–61 (2002)

  14. Leyton-Brown, K., Tennenholtz, M., Shoham, Y.: An algorithm for multi-unit combinatorial auctions. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Austin, Games-2000, Bilbao, and ISMP-2000, Atlanta (2000b)

  15. McAfee, R., McMillan, P.J.: Auctions and bidding. J. Econ. Lit. 25, 699–738 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Nisan, N.: Bidding and allocation in combinatorial auctions. In: Proceedings of ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (EC’00), pp. 1–12. Minneapolis: ACM SIGecom, ACM, October (2000)

  17. Rothkopf, M.H., Pekee, A., Ronald, M.: Computationally manageable combinatorial auctions. Manage. Sci. 44(8), 1131–1147 (1998)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Sandholm, T.: Algorithms for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auctions. Artif. Intell. 135(1–2), 1–54 (1999)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Sandholm, T.: Optimal winner determination algorithms. In: Cramton, P., et al. (ed.), Combinatorial Auctions. MIT, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sandholm, T., Suri, S.: Improved optimal algorithm for combinatorial auctions and generalizations. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 90–97 (2000)

  21. Sandholm, T., Suri, S., Gilpin, A., Levine, D.: CABoB: a fast optimal algorithm for combinatorial auctions. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1102–1108 (2001)

  22. Vries de, S., Vohra, R.: Combinatorial auctions a survey. INFORMS J. Comput. 15, 284–309 (2003)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LRIA, Université des Sciences et de la Technologie Houari Boumediène, BP32 El-Alia, Beb-Ezzoaur, Algiers, 16111, Algeria

    Dalila Boughaci & Habiba Drias

  2. LSIS. UMR CNRS 6168, Université de Provence, CMI 39 rue Frederic Joliot-Curie, 13453, Marseille cedex 13, France

    Dalila Boughaci & Belaïd Benhamou

Authors
  1. Dalila Boughaci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Belaïd Benhamou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Habiba Drias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dalila Boughaci.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Boughaci, D., Benhamou, B. & Drias, H. Local Search Methods for the Optimal Winner Determination Problem in Combinatorial Auctions. J Math Model Algor 9, 165–180 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10852-010-9127-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10852-010-9127-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation