/
P2P Incentives  Dror  Marcus P2P Incentives  Dror  Marcus

P2P Incentives Dror Marcus - PowerPoint Presentation

iainnoli
iainnoli . @iainnoli
Follow
342 views
Uploaded On 2020-08-28

P2P Incentives Dror Marcus - PPT Presentation

Yoni Deny Confess Hadas Deny Redo the test Yoni is free Hadas is expelled from school Confess Yoni is expelled from school Hadas is free Both fail this course Yoni Deny ID: 809249

reputation scrip hop systems scrip reputation systems hop optimizing peers peer request system performance bittorrent rate probability equilibrium money

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download The PPT/PDF document "P2P Incentives Dror Marcus" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

P2P Incentives

Dror

Marcus

Slide2

Yoni

Deny

Confess

Hadas

Deny

Redo

the test

Yoni is

free

Hadas

is expelled from school

Confess

Yoni is

expelled

from school

Hadas

is free

Both fail

this course

Slide3

Yoni

Deny

Confess

Hadas

Deny

Hadas : 2Yoni : 2Hadas : 0Yoni : 3Confess Hadas : 3Yoni : 0Hadas : 1Yoni : 1

Nash Equilibrium

Slide4

Outline

Optimizing Scrip Systems[1][2]

Modeling the problem

Finding optimal solutions

One hop reputation for

BitTorrent[3]Improving Tit-For-Tat

Slide5

Optimizing Scrip Systems

What is Scrip

?

Non-governmental currency

Users pay other users for service with scrip

Free riding is prevented through the need to earn scrip

Slide6

Optimizing Scrip Systems

How to model the problem?

Determine the amount of money in the system

How to set the pricing in the systems

How do newcomers effect the system

Slide7

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Model

Game of rounds

Each agent

i

: a: cost of satisfying a request b: probability of being able to satisfy a request g: value of having a request satisfied d: discount rate r: relative request rate (cost $1 if granted) : agent i‘s utility in round rTotal utility of an agent:

Slide8

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

initial

i

nteresting result

Altruism & Hoarders

There exists an value C, that depends only on a, b and d such that, in G(n, d, b, a) with at least C altruists, not volunteering is a dominant strategySet C > log1-b (a (1-d))Player’s request get satisfied for free with prob. Most additional expected utility to gain by having money is:

Slide9

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

initial

i

nteresting result - cont

Example:

b = 0.01 (each player can satisfy 1% of requests)a = 0.1d = 0.9999/day (≈ 0.95 per year)r = 1 per day Only need C > 1145Therefore, adding reputation system on top of existing P2P systems to influence cooperation will have no effect on rational users!Is this a problem?

Slide10

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Model Revised

Game of rounds

An

agent’s type t = (

at,bt,gt,dt,rt) at: cost of satisfying a request bt: probability of being able to satisfy a request gt: value of having a request satisfied dt: discount rate rt: relative request rate (probability to need something)

Slide11

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Strategy

Picking a wining strategy for players

Threshold strategy to win

S

kShow that this is the best strategyThreshold StrategyIn some round, I have k dollars and have to decide whether to volunteer. What should I do?Sk: Volunteer if I have less than k dollarsk is your “comfort level,” how much you want to have saved up for future requestsS0 corresponds to never volunteering and S¥ corresponds to always volunteering

Slide12

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Playing the game

Examining the game

How to describe the state of the system?

Slide13

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Playing the game

How to describe the state of the system?

Look at the distribution of Money.

Each state in the system represents the amount of money each player has.

Specifically:Each player can have {0,….,k} dollars ($)Let Dk denote the set of probability distributions on {0,…,k} represents the fraction of people that have each amount of moneyEach state s has its own distribution

Slide14

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Playing the game

The system is analyzed as a Markov Chain

The system always ends up in the same place!

Markov Chain

≈ The probability of moving from the current state to another only depends on the current state of the system. (We don’t care about the past)

Slide15

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Playing the game

The system is analyzed as a Markov Chain

The system always ends up in the same place*

Slide16

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Reaching Equilibrium

Equilibrium exists

There is an efficient algorithm to find this

equilibrium

Agent response : How to set its threshold (k)If dt is not too small, and every agent but i plays a threshold strategy, then agent i has an e-best response that is a threshold strategy. Agent i’s best response function is monotone in the strategies of the other agents

Slide17

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Reaching

Equilibrium

Slide18

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

Recap

Have a model to describe the system

System reaches a steady state (money distribution)

Equilibrium exists

What Next?

Slide19

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

optimize performance

Improved performance

Better social welfare i.e.

M

ore utilityHow to improve performance?Increasing the amount of money in the system up to a certain point, after which the system experience a monetary crash The Capitol Hill Babysitting Co-op

Slide20

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

optimize performance

The Capitol Hill Babysitting Co-op

Issued supply of scrip: each coupon work 30min babysitting.

Initially all saved for a rainy day

More coupons were issuedMost couples felt “rich”, no one wanted to babysit

Slide21

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

optimize

performance

Given an Equilibrium, how good is it?

If a request in satisfied, social welfare increases by

gt-at.What are the chances for a request being satisfied:Requester needs to have money – Probability 1-M0Need to have a volunteer – Probability ≈1 Total expected welfare summed over all rounds: Therefore minimizing M0 maximizes utility!

Slide22

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

optimize

performance

Given an Equilibrium, how good is it?

If a request in satisfied, social welfare increases by

gt-at.What are the chances for a request being satisfied:Requester needs to have money – Probability 1-M0Need to have a volunteer – Probability ≈1 Total expected welfare summed over all rounds: Therefore minimizing M0 maximizes utility!HW? – How did we reach this equation?

Slide23

Optimizing Scrip Systems:

optimize

performance

Slide24

Outline

Optimizing Scrip Systems[1][2]

Modeling the problem

Finding optimal solutions

One hop reputation for

BitTorrent[3]Improving Tit-For-TatIncentives for Live P2P streaming (bonus )Creating incentives to stream video

Slide25

BitTorrent

Refresh

File is broken to small blocks (32-256 KB

)

A

tracker site keeps track of the active participants + extra statistics. Seed – A peer that finished downloading, and has all the pieces of the fileLeecher – A peer that is still downloading pieces of the fileSwarm – tracker sends list of ~40 peers downloading the file to a new leecher together forming a swarm.Chocking Algorithm – Choose top k-1 peers from the swarm with highest rates + 1 random peer (optimistic unchoke) to upload to. All k peers receive the same upload rate.

Slide26

BitTorrent

Refresh

File is broken to small blocks (32-256 KB

)

A

tracker site keeps track of the active participants + extra statistics. Seed – A peer that finished downloading, and has all the pieces of the fileLeecher – A peer that is still downloading pieces of the fileSwarm – tracker sends list of ~40 peers downloading the file to a new leecher together forming a swarm.Chocking Algorithm – Choose top k-1 peers from the swarm with highest rates + 1 random peer (optimistic unchoke) to upload to. All k peers receive the same upload rate.HW – Think of at least two different ways to exploit the current incentives methods in Bittorrent (tit-for-tat, chocking, unchocking) to gain more download rate for less upload

Slide27

One hop reputation :

Sharing in the wiled

Large scale measurements of

bittorent

“in the wild”

More then 14 million peers and 60,000 swarms studied.Data was collected in two traces BT-1 (~13K swarms) and BT-2 (~55K Swarms).Measurements were used to analyze both current BitTorrent performance and the new “one-hop” method effectiveness.

Slide28

One hop reputation :

BitTorrent

Performance

Performance and availability are extremely poor

Median download rate in swarms is 14

KBps for a peer contributing 100KBps.25% of swarms are unavailable.

Slide29

One hop reputation :

BitTorrent

Performance - cont

Weak Incentives

Peers at low end of capacity see large returns in

contributionsIncrease by 100-fold only improves by 2-foldThe incentive is the weakest for the peers that can help the most

Slide30

One hop reputation :

BitTorrent

Performance - cont

Altruism

Seeds do not have requests and can’t use tit-for-tat for making decisions.

Too many seeds weakens contribution incentives.Too few seeds also weakens incentives since peers quickly run out of data to trade.Overall performance is mixedSome swarms enjoy many altruistic donations (enabling free-riding).Other swarms are “starved” for data

Slide31

One hop reputation:

What can be done?

Can long-term history between peers be used (instead of tit-for-tat)?

Slide32

One hop reputation:

What can be done?

Can long-term history between peers be used (instead of tit-for-tat)?

Slide33

One hop reputation

97% of all peers observed in trace BT-2 are connected directly or through one of the 2000 most popular peers.

Slide34

One hop reputation

Protocol

Notations and peer state information

Slide35

One hop reputation

Protocol

Each peer selects it’s

top K

intermediaries.

When two peers meet first, they exchange top K sets and compute intersection.For each intermediate, peers request receipts of contributions.Multiple peers can serve as intermediaries.Receipt messages are sent periodically from receiver to sender. Also update messages are sent to intermediaries.

Slide36

For each peer P request

If P interacted with me before use:

Otherwise get random subset of joint Top K mediators and compute reputation according to:

Where:

One hop

reputationDefault policy

Slide37

For each peer P request

If reputation is above a threshold, send data to P at rate proportional to it’s reputation

One hop

reputation

Default policy

- cont

Slide38

One hop reputation

Default policy

Slide39

My reputation is on the line!

Even if a “evil” peer convinces a popular intermediary to recommend him, his own good standing will reduce and he will no longer be popular.

One hop

reputation

Reputation

Slide40

Peers can gain good standings by:

1) Contributing to an

intermediary directly

2)

Contributing to a peer that satisfied the intermediary request in the pastIn (1), there is an increase of reputation in the intermediary. In (2), reputation of one peer is simply moved to the other.One hop reputationLiquidity

Slide41

Total reputation (liquidity of intermediary) is limited by its

own demand

.

Solved by

inflation factor of

100.Inflation also provide incentive to be intermediary.Potential for economic inflation.One hop reputationLiquidity

Slide42

One hop reputation

Evaluation

Slide43

Data overhead

Maximum overhead for popular

intermediary

of 3MB per day.

How good is the one hop coverage (

In BT-2 trace)?Median number of shared intermediaries is 83More than 99% of peers have at least one common entry in their top K.One hop reputationEvaluation

Slide44

How quickly can a new peer determine intermediary value?

After a few dozen interactions with randomly chosen peers.

One hop

reputation

Evaluation -

New Users

Slide45

How quickly can a new peer gain reputation?

Peers observe popular intermediaries frequently.

New users both encounter opportunity to gain standings and recognize it.

What can they exchange?

One hop

reputationEvaluation - New Users

Slide46

Evaluation show concrete improved performance, regardless of strengthened incentives.

25 MB file download was tested on

PlanetLab

Historical information allows peers to find good tit-for-tat peering.

Results show a

median reduction in download time from 972 seconds to 766 secondsOne hop reputationEvaluation – Performance

Slide47

Questions?

Slide48

[1]

Efficientcy

and Nash

equilibria

in a scrip system

for P2P networksIan A. Kash, Eric J. Friedman, Joseph Y. Halpern[2] Optimizing scrip systems: Eciency, crashes, hoarders, and altruistsIan A. Kash, Eric J. Friedman, Joseph Y. Halpern[3] One hop Reputations for Peer to Peer File Sharing WorkloadsMichael Piatek Tomas Isdal Arvind Krishnamurthy Thomas Anderson. Papers