Model of a news filtering economy

Our model system is an information filtering economy, first described in ref. [Kephart et al., 1998]. It consists of a source agent that publishes news articles, C consumer agents that want to buy articles they are interested in, B broker agents that buy selected articles from the source and resell them to consumers, and a system infrastructure that provides communication and computation services to all agents. A diagram showing part of our model system is shown in Fig. 1. The ellipse at the top represents the source agent, brokers are in the middle, and consumers are at the bottom. Each agent's internal parameters (defined below) are printed inside its ellipse. The system is represented by the rectangle on the left. Solid lines represent the propagation of a sample article through broker 1. Broken lines indicate payment, and are labeled with symbols (explained below) for the amount paid.

   figure45
Figure: Part of an idealized news filtering economy. Only a subset of agents is shown. See text for interpretation of symbols.

The source agent publishes one article at each time step t, and waits until that article has propagated through the system before publishing the next. It classifies articles according to its own internal categorization scheme, assigning each a category index j when it is offered. The nature of the categories, and the number J of them, do not change. We represent this (hidden) classification scheme by a random process in which an article is assigned category j with fixed probability tex2html_wrap_inline598 . The set of all tex2html_wrap_inline598 is the source's category prevalence vector tex2html_wrap_inline602 . Each article labeled with its category index and offered for sale to all brokers at a fixed price tex2html_wrap_inline604 . For each article sold to each broker, the source pays a fixed transport cost tex2html_wrap_inline606 .

Upon receiving an offer, each broker b decides whether or not to buy the article using its own evaluation method to select which categories it is ``interested'' in. The broker's evaluation method is approximated by an interest vector tex2html_wrap_inline610 , where tex2html_wrap_inline612 represents the probability for b to purchase an article labeled with category j. Analysis of the model [Kephart et al., 1998] shows that it is in broker b's best interest to set the tex2html_wrap_inline612 individually to either 0 or 1.

When broker b purchases an article, it immediately sends it to a set of subscribing consumers, paying tranportation cost tex2html_wrap_inline606 for each. Subscribers may examine the article, but must pay the broker tex2html_wrap_inline626 if they want the right to use (``consume'') it. The broker's internal parameters tex2html_wrap_inline610 and tex2html_wrap_inline626 are under its direct control.

Subscriptions are represented by a subscription matrix S, where tex2html_wrap_inline634 if consumer c subscribes to broker b, and tex2html_wrap_inline640 if not. Subscriptions are maintained only with the consent of both parties and may be cancelled by either. For example, a broker b might not wish c to subscribe if the cost of sending articles exceeds the expected payment from c, or c might not find it worthwhile to subscribe to b if the cost of sifting through lots of junk outweighs the benefit of receiving the rare interesting article. The requirement that the agreement be bilateral is represented by setting tex2html_wrap_inline652 , where tex2html_wrap_inline654 if broker b wants consumer c as a subscriber and tex2html_wrap_inline660 if not; similarly, tex2html_wrap_inline662 if consumer c want to subscribe to broker b and tex2html_wrap_inline668 if not.

Each consumer waits for articles to arrive from the brokers it subscribes to. When a consumer receives one or more copies of an article, it pays the computation cost tex2html_wrap_inline670 to evaluate whether it is interested in the article, then decides whether (and from whom) to buy it. Like the brokers, the consumers' evaluation function is approximated by a stochastic process parametrized by an interest vector tex2html_wrap_inline672 : consumer c will be interested in an article labeled with category j with fixed probability tex2html_wrap_inline678 . If a consumer is interested in an article, it then selects from the set of brokers it subscribes to the one broker tex2html_wrap_inline680 with the most attractive offer; we shall assume the most attractive offer is the cheapest one. The consumer then decides whether its interest justifies paying tex2html_wrap_inline682 for that article. For reasons of simplicity, we model this decision process as follows: each consumer assigns a global constant anticipated value V to each article it is interested in. Then if tex2html_wrap_inline686 , it purchases the usage rights; otherwise it discards the article unused.

An alternative formulation of the system replaces the consumer's computational cost tex2html_wrap_inline670 with a cost tex2html_wrap_inline690 for receiving and discarding ``junk''. In this case the consumer either pays tex2html_wrap_inline682 to the broker for the rights to an article, or tex2html_wrap_inline690 to the system to dispose of it. A simple algebraic transformation renders these two views mathematically equivalent: in all that follows, simply replace V with tex2html_wrap_inline698 and tex2html_wrap_inline670 with tex2html_wrap_inline690 .

Each broker's or consumer's decision-making process may be expressed as an attempt to optimize its utility function, defined as the amount of net ``value'' or ``utility''--however it may be measured--gained by making that particular decision. In the system described here, the expected utility per article for each broker and consumer may be explicitly formulated from the system variables. For consumers, the anticipated value V provides the fundamental benchmark for measuring utility. For brokers, the appropriate measure of utility is profit, defined in the usual way as revenue less expenses. General expressions for consumer utility and broker profit may be found in ref. [Kephart et al., 1998].


BACK TO INDEX PAGE | NEXT SECTION | PREVIOUS SECTION