Advertisement

Co-utility pp 17-32 | Cite as

Incentive-Based Co-utility: Co-utile Reputation Management

  • Josep Domingo-FerrerEmail author
  • Oriol Farràs
  • David Sánchez
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Systems, Decision and Control book series (SSDC, volume 110)

Abstract

Well-designed protocols should be self-enforcing, that is, be such that rational participating agents have no motivation to deviate from them. In addition, protocols can have other interesting properties, such as promoting collaboration between agents in a search for a better outcome. In [7, 8], we proposed the notion of co-utility, which characterizes a situation in which mutual help is the best rational option to take even for purely selfish agents; in particular, if a protocol is co-utile, it is self-enforcing. However, guaranteeing self-enforcement, let alone co-utility, for any type of agent behavior is not possible. To tackle this issue, in this chapter we detail how reputation mechanisms can be incorporated into existing protocols in order to make them self-enforcing (and optionally co-utile). Moreover, we show how to adapt and extend the well-known EigenTrust reputation calculation mechanism so that: (i) it can be applied to a variety of scenarios and heterogeneous reputation needs and, (ii) it is itself co-utile, and hence selfish agents are interested in following it. Obtaining a co-utile reputation mechanism creates a “virtuous circle” because: (i) the reputation management is self-enforcing and, (ii) as a result, it can be used to turn protocols that were not self-enforcing (resp. co-utile) per se into self-enforcing (resp. co-utile) ones.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding by the Templeton World Charity Foundation (grant TWCF0095/AB60 “CO-UTILITY”) is gratefully acknowledged. Also, partial support to this work has been received from the Government of Catalonia (ICREA Acadèmia Prize to J. Domingo-Ferrer and grant 2014 SGR 537), the Spanish Government (projects TIN2014-57364-C2-1-R “SmartGlacis”, TIN2015-70054-REDC and TIN2016-80250-R “Sec-MCloud”) and the European Commission (projects H2020-644024 “CLARUS” and H2020-700540 “CANVAS”). The authors are with the UNESCO Chair in Data Privacy, but the views in this work are the authors’ own and are not necessarily shared by UNESCO or any of the funding bodies.

References

  1. 1.
    Adler, B., de Alfaro, L.: A content-driven reputation system for the Wikipedia. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW). pp. 261–270. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    BlaBlaCar: http://www.blablacar.com/. Accessed 14 Oct 2015
  3. 3.
    Carverlee, J., Liu, L., Webb, S.: The SocialTrust framework for trusted social information management: architecture and algorithms. Inf. Sci. 180(1), 95–112 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Megías, D.: Co-utility for digital content protection and digital forgetting. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking Workshop, MedHocNet 2016, pp. 1–7. IEEE, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Farràs, O., Martínez, S., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Self-enforcing protocols via co-utile reputation management. Inf. Sci. 367–368, 159–175 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., González-Nicolás, Ú.: Rational behavior in peer-to-peer profile obfuscation for anonymous keyword search. Inf. Sci. 185, 191–204 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Martínez, S., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing protocols for the mutual benefit of participants. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 59, 148–158 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Soria-Comas, J.: Co-utility: self-enforcing collaborative protocols with mutual help. Prog. Artif. Intell. 5(2), 105–110 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Domingo-Ferrer, J., Soria-Comas, J., Ciobotaru, O.: Co-utility: self-enforcing protocols without coordination mechanisms. In: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, IEOM 2015, pp. 1–17. IEEE, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feldman, M., Padimitriou, C., Chuang, J., Stoica, I.: Free-riding and whitewashing in peer-to-peer systems. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 24(5), 1010–1019 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guha, R., Kumar, R., Raghavan, P., Tomkins, A.: Propagation of trust and distrust. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the World Wide Web, pp. 403–412. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoffman, K., Zage, D., Nita-Rotaru, C.: A survey of attack and defense techniques for reputation systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 42(1):art 1 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kamvar, S.D., Schlosser, M.T., Garcia-Molina, H.: The EigenTrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 640–651. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, Y.A., Phalak, R.: A trust prediction framework in rating-based experience sharing social networks without a Web of Trust. Inf. Sci. 191, 128–145 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Levine, B.N., Shields, C., Margolin, N.B.: A survey of solutions to the Sybil attack. Tech report, pp. 2006–052. University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marti, S., Garcia-Molina, H.: Taxonomy of trust: categorizing P2P reputation systems. Comput. Netw. 50(4), 472–484 (2006)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pouwelse, J.A., Garbacki, P., Epema, D.H.J., Sips, H.J.: The Bittorrent P2P file-sharing system: measurements and analysis. In: 4th International Workshop on Peer-To-Peer Systems, LNCS 3640, pp. 205–216. Springer, Berlin (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sánchez, D., Martínez, S., Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Co-utile P2P ridesharing via decentralization and reputation management. Transp. Res. Part C 73, 147–166 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Singh, A., Liu, L.: TrustMe: anonymous management of trust relationships in decentralized P2P systems. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, pp. 142–149 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Srivatsa, M., Xiong, L., Liu, L.: TrustGuard: countering vulnerabilities in reputation management for decentralized overlay networks. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the World Wide Web, pp. 422–431. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Soria-Comas, J., Domingo-Ferrer, J.: Co-utile Collaborative Anonymization of Microdata. In: Torra, V., Narukawa, Y. (eds.) MDAI, pp. 192–206. Springer, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Turi, A.N., Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Osmani D.: Co-utility: conciliating individual freedom on common good in the crowd based business model. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on e-Business Engineering, ICBE 2015, pp. 62–67. IEEE, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Turi, A.N., Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D., Osmani, D.: A co-utility approach to the mesh economy: the crowd-based business model. Review of Managerial Science. (2016, in press)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Turi, A. N., Domingo-Ferrer, J., Sánchez, D.: Filtering P2P loans on co-utile reputation. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Applied Computing-AC 2016, pp. 139–146 (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Walsh, K., Sirer, E.G.: Experience with and object reputation system for peer-to-peer filesharing. In: Symposium on Networked System Design and Implementation-NSDI’06 (2006)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhou, R., Hwang, K.: PowerTrust: a robust and scalable reputation system for trusted peer-to-peer computing. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 18(4), 460–473 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhou, R., Hwang, K., Cai, M.: GossipTrust for fast reputation aggregation in peer-to-peer networks. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 20(9), 1282–1295 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josep Domingo-Ferrer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Oriol Farràs
    • 1
  • David Sánchez
    • 1
  1. 1.UNESCO Chair in Data Privacy, Department of Computer Science and MathematicsUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliTarragona, CataloniaSpain

Personalised recommendations