Skip to main content
Log in

Strategy/False-name Proof Protocols for Combinatorial Multi-Attribute Procurement Auction

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

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate a model of a combinatorial, procurement multi-attribute auction, in which each sales item is defined by several attributes called quality, the buyer is the auctioneer (e.g., a government), and the sellers are the bidders. Furthermore, there exist multiple items and both buyer and sellers can have arbitrary (e.g., substitutable/complementary) preferences on a bundle of items. Our goal is to develop a protocol that is strategy-proof for sellers. We first present a VickreyClarkeGroves (VCG)-type protocol. As in a standard combinatorial auction, a VCG-type protocol is not false-name-proof, i.e., it is vulnerable against manipulations using multiple identifiers. Next, we show that any strategy-proof protocol in this model can be represented as a framework called Price-Oriented Rationing-Free (PORF) protocol, in which for each bidder, for each bundle of items, and for each quality, the payment for the bidder is determined independently of his own declaration, and the bidder can obtain a bundle that maximizes his utility independently of the allocations of other bidders. We develop a false-name-proof protocol in this model.

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

Access this article

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. M. Bichler (2000) ArticleTitle“An experimental analysis of multi-attribute auction” Decision Support Syst 28 IssueID3 249–268 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0167-9236(00)00075-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. M. Bichler and J. Kalagnanam, “Bidding languages and winner determination in multi-attribute auctions”. Technical Report RC 22478, IBM Research Report, 2002.

  3. Y. Che (1993) ArticleTitle“Design competition through multidimensional auctions” RAND. J. Econ 24 IssueID4 668–680

    Google Scholar 

  4. E. H. Clarke (1971) ArticleTitle“Multipart pricing of public goods” Public Choice 2 19–33

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. David, R. Azoulay-Schwartz, and S. Kraus, “Protocols and strategies for automated multi-attribute auctions”. in: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-2002), pp. 77–85, 2002.

  6. E. David, R. Azoulay-Schwartz, and S. Kraus, “Bidders’ strategy for multi-attribute sequential English auction with a Deadline”. in: Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent systems (AAMAS-2003), pp. 457–464, 2003.

  7. S. Vries Particlede R. V. Vohra (2003) ArticleTitleCombinatorial auctions: A survey” INFORMS J Comput 15 284–309 Occurrence Handle10.1287/ijoc.15.3.284.16077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. A. Giovannucci, J. A. Rodríguez-Aguilar, A. Reyes, F. X. Noria, and J. Cerquides, “Towards automated procurement via agent-aware negotiation support”, in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS-2004), pp. 244–251, 2004.

  9. T. Groves (1973) ArticleTitle“Incentives in teams” Econometrica 41 617–631

    Google Scholar 

  10. A. Mas-Colell, M. D. Whinston, and J. R. Green, Microeconomic Theory, Oxford University Press, 1995.

  11. R. B. Myerson (1981) ArticleTitle“Optimal auction design” Math. Operat. Res 6 58–73

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. C. Parkes and L. H. Ungar, “Iterative combinatorial auctions: Theory and practice”. in: Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), pp. 74–81, 2000.

  13. T. Sandholm, “An algorithm for optimal winner determination in combinatorial auction”, in: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-99). pp. 542–547, 1999.

  14. W. Vickrey (1961) ArticleTitle“Counter speculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders” J. Finance 16 8–37

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Yokoo, “Characterization of strategy/False-name proof combinatorial auction protocols: Price-oriented, rationing-free protocol”. in: Proceedings of 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-2003), pp. 733–739, 2003.

  16. M. Yokoo Y. Sakurai S. Matsubara (2001) ArticleTitleRobust combinatorial auction protocol against false-name bids” Artif, Intell 130 IssueID2 167–181

    Google Scholar 

  17. M. Yokoo Y. Sakurai S. Matsubara (2004) ArticleTitleThe effect of false-name bids in combinatorial auctions: New fraud in Internet auctions” Games Econ. Behav 46 IssueID1 174–188 Occurrence Handle10.1016/S0899-8256(03)00045-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takayuki Suyama.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Suyama, T., Yokoo, M. Strategy/False-name Proof Protocols for Combinatorial Multi-Attribute Procurement Auction. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 11, 7–21 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-0983-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-005-0983-2

Keywords

Navigation