IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/intdis/v17y2021i6p15501477211023010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incentive mechanism based on Stackelberg game under reputation constraint for mobile crowdsensing

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoxiao Yang
  • Jing Zhang
  • Jun Peng
  • Lihong Lei

Abstract

Encouraging a certain number of users to participate in a sensing task continuously for collecting high-quality sensing data under a certain budget is a new challenge in the mobile crowdsensing. The users’ historical reputation reflects their past performance in completing sensing tasks, and users with high historical reputation have outstanding performance in historical tasks. Therefore, this study proposes a reputation constraint incentive mechanism algorithm based on the Stackelberg game to solve the abovementioned problem. First, the user’s historical reputation is applied to select some trusted users for collecting high-quality sensing data. Then, the two-stage Stackelberg game is used to analyze the user’s resource contribution level in the sensing task and the optimal incentive mechanism of the server platform. The existence and uniqueness of Stackelberg equilibrium are verified by determining the user’s optimal response strategy. Finally, two conversion methods of the user’s total payoff are proposed to ensure flexible application of the user’s payoff in the mobile crowdsensing network. Simulation experiments show that the historical reputation of selected trusted users is higher than that of randomly selected users, and the server platform and users have good utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoxiao Yang & Jing Zhang & Jun Peng & Lihong Lei, 2021. "Incentive mechanism based on Stackelberg game under reputation constraint for mobile crowdsensing," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 17(6), pages 15501477211, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:intdis:v:17:y:2021:i:6:p:15501477211023010
    DOI: 10.1177/15501477211023010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/15501477211023010
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/15501477211023010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric Maskin, 1999. "Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(1), pages 23-38.
    2. A. P. Dawid & A. M. Skene, 1979. "Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Observer Error‐Rates Using the EM Algorithm," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 28(1), pages 20-28, March.
    3. Jing Zhang & Li Lei & Xin Feng, 2019. "Energy-efficient collaborative transmission algorithm based on potential game theory for beamforming," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 15(9), pages 15501477198, September.
    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. Lombardi, Michele & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2016. "Partially-honest Nash Implementation with Non-connected Honesty Standards," Discussion Paper Series 633, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    2. Dubey, Pradeep & Sondermann, Dieter, 2009. "Perfect competition in an oligopoly (including bilateral monopoly)," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 124-141, January.
    3. Núñez, Matías & Laslier, Jean-François, 2015. "Bargaining through Approval," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 63-73.
    4. Yi, Jianxin, 2012. "Double implementation in Nash and M-Nash equilibria," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(1), pages 105-107.
    5. Nieken, Petra & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2012. "Repeated moral hazard and contracts with memory: A laboratory experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 1000-1008.
    6. Tian, Guoqiang, 2004. "On the Informational Requirements of Decentralized Pareto-Satisfactory Mechanisms in Economies with Increasing Returns," MPRA Paper 41226, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2006.
    7. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2019. "Implementation without expected utility: ex-post verifiability," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(4), pages 575-585, December.
    8. Lagunoff, Roger, 2006. "Credible communication in dynastic government," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-2), pages 59-86, January.
    9. Ronen Gradwohl, 2018. "Privacy in implementation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(3), pages 547-580, March.
    10. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Martimort, David, 2005. "The design of transnational public good mechanisms for developing countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 159-196, February.
    11. Ahmed Doghmi & Abderrahmane Ziad, 2013. "Nash Implementation in Private Good Economies with Single-Plateaued Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 201311, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    12. Lombardi, Michele & Yoshihara, Naoki, 2013. "Natural implementation with partially honest agents in economic environments," MPRA Paper 48294, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Martimort, David & Semenov, Aggey, 2008. "The informational effects of competition and collusion in legislative politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(7), pages 1541-1563, July.
    14. Mizukami, Hideki & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & Wakayama, Takuma, 2003. "Strategy-Proof Sharing," Working Papers 1170, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    15. Yajing Chen & Zhenhua Jiao & Chenfeng Zhang & Luosai Zhang, 2021. "The Machiavellian frontier of top trading cycles," Papers 2106.14456, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    16. Alan Schwartz, 2004. "The Law and Economics of Costly Contracting," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 2-31, April.
    17. Hagen, Martin, 2019. "Collusion-proof and fair auctions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    18. Healy, Paul J. & Peress, Michael, 2015. "Preference domains and the monotonicity of condorcet extensions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 21-23.
    19. Watson, Joel, 2006. "Contract and Mechanism Design in Settings with Multi-Period Trade," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt63s1s3j6, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    20. Triossi, Matteo, 2005. "Implementation with state dependent feasible sets and preferences: a renegotiation approach," UC3M Working papers. Economics we057136, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.

    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:sae:intdis:v:17:y:2021:i:6:p:15501477211023010. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.