Luca Moscardelli

Bio: Luca Moscardelli is an academic researcher from University of Chieti-Pescara. The author has contributed to research in topics: Price of anarchy & Nash equilibrium. The author has an hindex of 20, co-authored 97 publications receiving 1347 citations. Previous affiliations of Luca Moscardelli include University of Salerno & University of L'Aquila.

Tight Bounds for Selfish and Greedy Load Balancing

Abstract: We study the load balancing problem in the context of a set of clients each wishing to run a job on a server selected among a subset of permissible servers for the particular client. We consider two different scenarios. In selfish load balancing, each client is selfish in the sense that it chooses, among its permissible servers, to run its job on the server having the smallest latency given the assignments of the jobs of other clients to servers. In online load balancing, clients appear online and, when a client appears, it has to make an irrevocable decision and assign its job to one of its permissible servers. Here, we assume that the clients aim to optimize some global criterion but in an online fashion. A natural local optimization criterion that can be used by each client when making its decision is to assign its job to that server that gives the minimum increase of the global objective. This gives rise to greedy online solutions. The aim of this paper is to determine how much the quality of load balancing is affected by selfishness and greediness. We characterize almost completely the impact of selfishness and greediness in load balancing by presenting new and improved, tight or almost tight bounds on the price of anarchy of selfish load balancing as well as on the competitiveness of the greedy algorithm for online load balancing when the objective is to minimize the total latency of all clients on servers with linear latency functions. In addition, we prove a tight upper bound on the price of stability of linear congestion games.

Tight bounds for selfish and greedy load balancing

Abstract: We study the load balancing problem in the context of a set of clients each wishing to run a job on a server selected among a subset of permissible servers for the particular client. We consider two different scenarios. In selfish load balancing, each client is selfish in the sense that it selects to run its job to the server among its permissible servers having the smallest latency given the assignments of the jobs of other clients to servers. In online load balancing, clients appear online and, when a client appears, it has to make an irrevocable decision and assign its job to one of its permissible servers. Here, we assume that the clients aim to optimize some global criterion but in an online fashion. A natural local optimization criterion that can be used by each client when making its decision is to assign its job to that server that gives the minimum increase of the global objective. This gives rise to greedy online solutions. The aim of this paper is to determine how much the quality of load balancing is affected by selfishness and greediness. We characterize almost completely the impact of selfishness and greediness in load balancing by presenting new and improved, tight or almost tight bounds on the price of anarchy and price of stability of selfish load balancing as well as on the competitiveness of the greedy algorithm for online load balancing when the objective is to minimize the total latency of all clients on servers with linear latency functions.

On the complexity of the regenerator placement problem in optical networks

Abstract: Placement of regenerators in optical networks has attracted the attention of recent research works in optical networks. In this problem, we are given a network with an underlying topology of a graph G and with a set of requests that correspond to paths in G. There is a need to put a regenerator every certain distance, because of a decrease in the power of the signal. In this paper, we investigate the problem of minimizing the number of locations to place the regenerators. We present analytical results regarding the complexity of this problem, in four cases, depending on whether or not there is a bound on the number of regenerators at each node, and depending on whether or not the routing is given or only the requests are given (and part of the solution is also to determine the actual routing). These results include polynomial time algorithms, NP-completeness results, approximation algorithms, and inapproximability results.

On the complexity of the regenerator placement problem in optical networks

Abstract: Placement of regenerators in optical networks has attracted the attention of recent research works in optical networks. In this problem we are given a network, with an underlying topology of a graph G, and with a set of requests that correspond to paths in G. There is a need to put a regenerator every certain distance, because of a decrease in the power of the signal. In this work we investigate the problem of minimizing the number of locations to place the regenerators. We present analytical results regarding the complexity of this problem, in four cases, depending on whether or not there is a bound on the number of regenerators at each node, and depending on whether or not the routing is given or only the requests are given (and part of the solution is also to determine the actual routing). These results include polynomial time algorithms, NP-complete results, approximation algorithms, and inapproximability results.

How to… home page

Abstract: Home PURPOSE OF THE CENTER: To develop the center to address state-of-the-art research, create innovating educational programs, and support technology transfers using commercially viable results to assist the Army Research Laboratory to develop the next generation Future Combat System in the telecommunications sector that assures prevention of perceived threats, and Non Line of Sight/Beyond Line of Sight lethal support.

The Price of Stability for Network Design with Fair Cost Allocation

Abstract: Network design is a fundamental problem for which it is important to understand the effects of strategic behavior. Given a collection of self-interested agents who want to form a network connecting certain endpoints, the set of stable solutions—the Nash equilibria—may look quite different from the centrally enforced optimum. We study the quality of the best Nash equilibrium, and refer to the ratio of its cost to the optimum network cost as the price of stability. The best Nash equilibrium solution has a natural meaning of stability in this context—it is the optimal solution that can be proposed from which no user will defect. We consider the price of stability for network design with respect to one of the most widely studied protocols for network cost allocation, in which the cost of each edge is divided equally between users whose connections make use of it; this fair-division scheme can be derived from the Shapley value and has a number of basic economic motivations. We show that the price of stability for network design with respect to this fair cost allocation is $O(\log k)$, where $k$ is the number of users, and that a good Nash equilibrium can be achieved via best-response dynamics in which users iteratively defect from a starting solution. This establishes that the fair cost allocation protocol is in fact a useful mechanism for inducing strategic behavior to form near-optimal equilibria. We discuss connections to the class of potential games defined by Monderer and Shapley, and extend our results to cases in which users are seeking to balance network design costs with latencies in the constructed network, with stronger results when the network has only delays and no construction costs. We also present bounds on the convergence time of best-response dynamics, and discuss extensions to a weighted game.

Energy-efficient algorithms

Abstract: Algorithmic solutions can help reduce energy consumption in computing environs.

Handbook of Computational Social Choice

Abstract: The rapidly growing field of computational social choice, at the intersection of computer science and economics, deals with the computational aspects of collective decision making. This handbook, written by thirty-six prominent members of the computational social choice community, covers the field comprehensively. Chapters devoted to each of the field's major themes offer detailed introductions. Topics include voting theory (such as the computational complexity of winner determination and manipulation in elections), fair allocation (such as algorithms for dividing divisible and indivisible goods), coalition formation (such as matching and hedonic games), and many more. Graduate students, researchers, and professionals in computer science, economics, mathematics, political science, and philosophy will benefit from this accessible and self-contained book.