IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i24p3214-d700982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Novel Auction Blockchain System with Price Recommendation and Trusted Execution Environment

Author

Listed:
  • Dong-Her Shih

    (Department of Information Management, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Douliu 64002, Taiwan)

  • Ting-Wei Wu

    (Department of Information Management, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Douliu 64002, Taiwan)

  • Ming-Hung Shih

    (Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University, 2520 Osborn Drive, Ames, IA 50011, USA)

  • Wei-Cheng Tsai

    (Department of Information Management, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Douliu 64002, Taiwan)

  • David C. Yen

    (Jesse H. Jones School of Business, Texas Southern University, 3100 Cleburne Street, Houston, TX 77004, USA)

Abstract

Online auctions are now widely used, with all the convenience and efficiency brought by internet technology. Despite the advantages over traditional auction methods, some challenges still remain in online auctions. According to the World Business Environment Survey (WBES) conducted by the World Bank, about 60% of companies have admitted to bribery and manipulation of the auction results. In addition, buyers are prone to the winner’s curse in an online auction environment. Since the increase in information availability can reduce uncertainty, easy access to relevant auction information is essential for buyers to avoid the winner’s curse. In this study, we propose an Online Auction Price Suggestion System (OAPSS) to protect the data from being interfered with by third-party programs based on Intel’s Software Guard Extensions (SGX) technology and the characteristics of the blockchain. Our proposed system provides a smart contract by using α-Sutte indicator in the final transaction price prediction as a bidding price recommendation, which helps buyers to reduce the information uncertainty on the value of the product. The amount spent on the smart contract in this study, excluding deployed contracts, plus the rest of the fees is less than US$1. Experimental results of the simulation show that there is a significant difference ( p < 0.05) between the recommended price group and the actual price group in the highest bid. Therefore, we may conclude that our proposed bidder’s price recommendation function in the smart contract may mitigate the loss of buyers caused by the winner’s curse.

Suggested Citation

  • Dong-Her Shih & Ting-Wei Wu & Ming-Hung Shih & Wei-Cheng Tsai & David C. Yen, 2021. "A Novel Auction Blockchain System with Price Recommendation and Trusted Execution Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(24), pages 1-19, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:24:p:3214-:d:700982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/24/3214/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/24/3214/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frédéric Boehm & Juanita Olaya, 2006. "Corruption In Public Contracting Auctions: The Role Of Transparency In Bidding Processes," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 77(4), pages 431-452, December.
    2. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    3. Foti, Magda & Vavalis, Manolis, 2019. "Blockchain based uniform price double auctions for energy markets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    4. Goeree, Jacob K. & Offerman, Theo, 2003. "Winner's curse without overbidding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 625-644, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matteo Migheli, 2017. "The winner’s curse in auctions with losses," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 16(1), pages 113-126, November.
    2. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2007. "Level-k Auctions: Can a Nonequilibrium Model of Strategic Thinking Explain the Winner's Curse and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1721-1770, November.
    3. Gregory E. Kersten & Tomasz Wachowicz & Margaret Kersten, 2016. "Competition, Transparency, and Reciprocity: A Comparative Study of Auctions and Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 693-722, July.
    4. Theo Offerman, 2002. "Efficiency in Auctions with Private and Common Values: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 625-643, June.
    5. Kocher, Martin G. & Pahlke, Julius & Trautmann, Stefan T., 2015. "An experimental study of precautionary bidding," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 27-38.
    6. Hongpeng Guo & Zhihao Lv & Junyi Hua & Hongxu Yuan & Qingyu Yu, 2021. "Design of Combined Auction Model for Emission Rights of International Forestry Carbon Sequestration and Other Pollutants Based on SMRA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Vinci Chow, 2019. "Predicting Auction Price of Vehicle License Plate with Deep Residual Learning," Papers 1910.04879, arXiv.org.
    8. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 1994. "Auctions with budget-constrained buyers: a nonequivalence result," Working Papers (Old Series) 9402, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    9. Kathryn M. Dominguez, 1991. "Do Exchange Auctions Work? An Examination of the Bolivian Experience," NBER Working Papers 3683, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Giuseppe Topa & Alain Karsenty & Carole Megevand & Laurent Debroux, 2009. "The Rainforests of Cameroon : Experience and Evidence from a Decade of Reform," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2683.
    11. Rasmusen Eric Bennett, 2006. "Strategic Implications of Uncertainty over One's Own Private Value in Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-24, November.
    12. Thomas D. Jeitschko, 1998. "Learning in Sequential Auctions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 98-112, July.
    13. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    14. Vladimirov, Vladimir, 2015. "Financing bidders in takeover contests," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 534-557.
    15. Chi, Chang Koo & Murto, Pauli & Valimaki, Juuso, 2017. "All-Pay Auctions with Affiliated Values," MPRA Paper 80799, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. John H. Kagel & Colin M. Campbell & Dan Levin, 1999. "The Winner's Curse and Public Information in Common Value Auctions: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 325-334, March.
    17. Charles Z. Zheng, 2014. "Existence of Monotone Equilibria in First-Price Auctions with Resale," University of Western Ontario, Economic Policy Research Institute Working Papers 20141, University of Western Ontario, Economic Policy Research Institute.
    18. Onur A. Koska & Frank Stähler, 2017. "When should bidders learn reserve prices?," ERC Working Papers 1712, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Oct 2017.
    19. Lamy, Laurent, 2012. "The econometrics of auctions with asymmetric anonymous bidders," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 167(1), pages 113-132.
    20. Olivier Chanel & Stéphanie Vincent, 2004. "Computing price trends in sequential auctions," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 70(4), pages 443-460.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:24:p:3214-:d:700982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.