IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v17y2015i3d10.1007_s10796-013-9432-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive and similarity-based tradeoff algorithms in a price-timeslot-QoS negotiation system to establish cloud SLAs

Author

Listed:
  • Seokho Son

    (Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology)

  • Kwang Mong Sim

    (The University of Kent)

Abstract

Since participants in a Cloud may be independent bodies, some mechanisms are necessary for resolving the different preferences to establish a service-level agreement (SLA) for Cloud service reservations. Whereas there are some mechanisms for supporting SLA negotiation, there is little or no negotiation support involving price, time slot, and QoS issues concurrently for a Cloud service reservation. For the concurrent price, timeslot, and QoS negotiation, a tradeoff algorithm to generate and evaluate a proposal which consists of price, timeslot, and QoS proposals is necessary. The contribution of this work is designing a multi-issue negotiation mechanism to facilitate 1) concurrent price, time slot, and QoS negotiations including the design of QoS utility functions and 2) adaptive and similarity-based trade-off proposals for price, time slots, and level of QoS issues. The tradeoff algorithm referred to as “adaptive burst mode” is especially designed to increase negotiation speed, total utility, and to reduce computational load for evaluating proposals by adaptively generating concurrent set of proposals. The empirical results obtained from simulations carried out using an agent-based testbed suggest that using the negotiation mechanism, (i) a consumer and a provider agent have a mutually satisfying agreement on price, time slot, and QoS issues in terms of the aggregated utility and (ii) the fastest negotiation speed with (iii) comparatively lower number of evaluated proposals in a negotiation.

Suggested Citation

  • Seokho Son & Kwang Mong Sim, 2015. "Adaptive and similarity-based tradeoff algorithms in a price-timeslot-QoS negotiation system to establish cloud SLAs," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 565-589, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:17:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-013-9432-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-013-9432-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-013-9432-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-013-9432-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1982. "Perfect Equilibrium in a Bargaining Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 97-109, January.
    2. Íñigo Goiri & Jordi Guitart & Jordi Torres, 2012. "Economic model of a Cloud provider operating in a federated Cloud," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 827-843, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li Chunlin & Li LaYuan, 2017. "Optimal scheduling across public and private clouds in complex hybrid cloud environment," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Bahador Shojaiemehr & Marjan Kuchaki Rafsanjani, 2018. "A supplier offer modification approach based on fuzzy systems for automated negotiation in e-commerce," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 143-160, February.
    3. Sanjaya K. Panda & Indrajeet Gupta & Prasanta K. Jana, 0. "Task scheduling algorithms for multi-cloud systems: allocation-aware approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    4. Bahador Shojaiemehr & Marjan Kuchaki Rafsanjani, 0. "A supplier offer modification approach based on fuzzy systems for automated negotiation in e-commerce," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-18.
    5. Sanjaya K. Panda & Indrajeet Gupta & Prasanta K. Jana, 2019. "Task scheduling algorithms for multi-cloud systems: allocation-aware approach," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 241-259, April.

    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. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    2. Lohmann, Susanne, 1997. "Partisan control of the money supply and decentralized appointment powers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 225-246, May.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    4. Seok-ju Cho & John Duggan, 2015. "A folk theorem for the one-dimensional spatial bargaining model," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 933-948, November.
    5. Mohr, Ernst, 1990. "Courts of appeal, bureaucracies and conditional project permits: The role of negotiating non-exclusive property rights over the environment," Kiel Working Papers 408, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    6. Olivier Compte & Philippe Jehiel, 2010. "The Coalitional Nash Bargaining Solution," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(5), pages 1593-1623, September.
    7. Laruelle, Annick & Valenciano, Federico, 2008. "Noncooperative foundations of bargaining power in committees and the Shapley-Shubik index," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 341-353, May.
    8. Núñez, Matías & Laslier, Jean-François, 2015. "Bargaining through Approval," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 63-73.
    9. Gantner, Anita & Horn, Kristian & Kerschbamer, Rudolf, 2016. "Fair and efficient division through unanimity bargaining when claims are subjective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 56-73.
    10. Simon Hug & Tobias Schulz, 2007. "Referendums in the EU’s constitution building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 177-218, June.
    11. Eric Levin & Thomas Moutos, 1991. "Unemployment insurance and union bargaining — an insider-outsider approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 271-284, October.
    12. Norman, Peter, 2002. "Legislative Bargaining and Coalition Formation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 322-353, February.
    13. Maryam Farboodi & Gregor Jarosch & Guido Menzio, 2016. "Intermediation as Rent Extraction," PIER Working Paper Archive 16-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Dec 2016.
    14. Agnieszka Rusinowska & Ahmet Ozkardas, 2015. "On equilibrium payoffs in wage bargaining with discount rates varying in time," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 181-199, October.
    15. Qian, Dong & Guo, Ju’e, 2014. "Research on the energy-saving and revenue sharing strategy of ESCOs under the uncertainty of the value of Energy Performance Contracting Projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 710-721.
    16. Radzvilas, Mantas, 2016. "Hypothetical Bargaining and the Equilibrium Selection Problem in Non-Cooperative Games," MPRA Paper 70248, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Guth, Werner & Ritzberger, Klaus & van Damme, Eric, 2004. "On the Nash bargaining solution with noise," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 697-713, June.
    18. Arnold Polanski & Emiliya Lazarova, 2015. "Dynamic multilateral markets," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(4), pages 815-833, November.
    19. Send, Jonas & Serena, Marco, 2022. "An empirical analysis of insistent bargaining," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    20. Shohei Yoshida, 2018. "Bargaining power and firm profits in asymmetric duopoly: an inverted-U relationship," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 139-158, June.

    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:spr:infosf:v:17:y:2015:i:3:d:10.1007_s10796-013-9432-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.