What the 2007 TAC Market Design Game tells us about effective auction mechanisms | Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

What the 2007 TAC Market Design Game tells us about effective auction mechanisms

  • Published:
Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper analyzes the entrants to the 2007 tac Market Design Game. We present a classification of the entries to the competition, and use this classification to compare these entries. The paper also attempts to relate market dynamics to the auction rules adopted by these entries and their adaptive strategies via a set of post-tournament experiments. Based on this analysis, the paper speculates about the design of effective auction mechanisms, both in the setting of this competition and in the more general case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Axelrod R. (2006) The evolution of cooperation. Basic Books, Persus Books Group, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cason, T. N., & Friedman, D. (2008). A comparison of market institutions. In C. Plott & V. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics results (Vol. 1), Chap. 33, North Holland.

  3. Clearwater, S. H. (Ed.). (1996). Market-based control: A paradigm for distributed resource allocation. River Edge, NJ: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cliff D. (2001) Evolution of market mechanism through a continuous space of auction-types. Technical report. Hewlett-Packard Research Laboratories, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cliff D., Bruten J. (1997) Minimal-intelligence agents for bargaining behaviours in market-based environments. Technical report. Hewlett-Packard Research Laboratories, Bristol

    Google Scholar 

  6. Das, R., Hanson, J. E., Kephart, J. O., & Tesauro, G. (2001). Agent-human interactions in the continuous double auction. In Proceedings of the seventeenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence. Seattle, USA.

  7. Erev I., Roth A. E. (1998) Predicting how people play games: Reinforcement learning in experimental games with unique, mixed strategy equilibria. The American Economic Review 88(4): 848–881

    Google Scholar 

  8. Friedman, D. (1993). The double auction institution: A survey. In [10], Chap. 1, (pp. 3–25).

  9. Friedman, D., & Rich C. (2008). The matching market institution. In Handbook of experimental economics results (Vol. 1), Chap. 13, North Holland.

  10. Friedman, D., & Rust, J. (Eds.). (1993). The double auction market: Institutions, theories and evidence. Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity. Cambridge, MA: Westview Press, Perseus Books Group.

  11. Fudenberg D., Levine D. K. (1998) The theory of learning in games. MIT, Cambridge, MA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Gerding, E., McBurney, P., Niu, J., Parsons, S., & Phelps, S. (2007). Overview of CAT: A market design competition, version 1.1, Technical Report ULCS-07-006. Liverpool, UK: Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool.

  13. Gjerstad S., Dickhaut J. (1998) Price formation in double auctions. Games and Economic Behavior 22: 1–29

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Gode D. K., Sunder S. (1993) Allocative efficiency of markets with zero-intelligence traders: Market as a partial substitute for individual rationality. Journal of Political Economy 101(1): 119–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. He M., Jennings N. R., Leung H. F. (2003) On agent-mediated electronic commerce. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 15(4): 985–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jordan, P. R., & Wellman, M. P. (2007). Best-first search for approximate equilibria in empirical games. In Proceedings of AAAI-07 workshop on trading agent design and analysis (TADA-07). Canada: Vancouver.

  17. Jordan, P. R., Kiekintveld, C., & Wellman, M. P. (2007). Empirical game-theoretic analysis of the TAC supply chain game. In Proceedings of the sixth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 1188–1195). Hawaii: Honolulu.

  18. Kaisers, M., Tuyls, K., Thuijsman, F., & Parsons, S. (2008). Auction analysis by normal form game approximation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology. Sydney, Australia, short paper.

  19. Klemperer P. (2002) How (not) to run auctions: The European 3G telecom auctions. European Economic Review 46(4–5): 829–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. MacKie-Mason, J. K., & Wellman, M. P. (2006). Automated markets and trading agents. In L. Tesfatsion & K. L. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of computational economics (Vol. 2, pp. 1381–1431), Amsterdam: Elsevier, Chap. 28.

  21. McCabe, K. A., Rassenti, S. J., & Smith, V. L. (1993). Designing a uniform price double auction. In [10], Chap. 11, (pp. 307–332).

  22. Niu, J., Cai, K., Parsons, S., & Sklar, E. (2006). Reducing price fluctuation in continuous double auctions through pricing policy and shout improvement rule. In Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 1143–1150). Japan: Hakodate.

  23. Niu, J., Cai, K., Parsons, S., & Sklar, E. (2007) Some preliminary results on competition between markets for automated traders. In Proceedings of AAAI-07 workshop on trading agent design and analysis (TADA-07). Canada: Vancouver.

  24. Niu J., Mmoloke A., McBurney P., Parsons S. (2007) CATP specification: A communication protocol for CAT games. Technical report. Department of Computer Science Graduate Center, City University of New York, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Niu, J., Cai, K., McBurney, P., & Parsons, S. (2008) An analysis of entries in the first TAC market design competition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on intelligent agent technology. Sydney, Australia.

  26. Niu, J., Cai, K., Parsons, S., Gerding, E., & McBurney, P. (2008). Characterizing effective auction mechanisms: Insights from the 2007 TAC mechanism design competition. In P. Padgham & P. Müller (Eds.). Proceedings of the seventh international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 1079–1086). Portugal: Estoril.

  27. Niu, J., Cai, K., Parsons, S., Gerding, E., McBurney, P., & Moyaux, T., et al. (2008). JCAT: A platform for the TAC market design competition. In P. Padgham, & P. Müller (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, demo paper (pp. 1649–1650). Portugal: Estoril.

  28. Pardoe D., Stone P. (2005) Developing adaptive auction mechanisms. ACM SIGecom Exchanges 5(3): 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Petric, A., Podobnik, V., Grguric, A., & Zemljic, M. (2008). Designing an effective e-market: An overview of the CAT agent. In Proceedings of AAAI-08 workshop on trading agent design and analysis (TADA-08) Chicago, IL, USA.

  30. Phelps, S. (2005). JASA—Java auction simulation API. http://jasa.sourceforget.net/.

  31. Phelps, S., McBurney, P., Parsons, S., & Sklar, E. (2002). Co-evolutionary auction mechanism design: A preliminary report. In Proceedings of the workshop on agent mediated electronic commerce IV (AMEC IV).

  32. Phelps, S., Parsons, S., Sklar, E., & McBurney, P. (2003). Using genetic programming to optimise pricing rules for a double auction market. In Proceedings of the workshop on agents for electronic commerce. Pittsburgh, PA.

  33. Phelps, S., Marcinkiewicz, M., Parsons, S., & McBurney, P. (2005). Using population-based search and evolutionary game theory to acquire better-response strategies for the double-auction market. In Proceedings of IJCAI-05 workshop on trading agent design and analysis (TADA-05).

  34. Phelps, S., Marcinkiewicz, M., Parsons, S., & McBurney, P. (2006). A novel method for automatic strategy acquisition in n-player non-zero-sum games. In Proceedings of the fifth international joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (AAMAS’06) (pp. 705–712). New York, NY: ACM. doi:10.1145/1160633.1160760.

  35. Plott C. R., Smith V. L. (1978) An experimental examination of two exchange institutions. The Review of Economic Studies 45(1): 133–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rust, J., Miller, J. H., & Palmer, R. G. (1993). Behaviour of trading automata in a computerized double auction market. In [10], Chap. 6, (pp. 155–199).

  37. Schwartz, R. A., Byrne, J. A., & Colaninno, A. (Eds.). (2007). The New NASDAQ Marketplace. Zicklin School of Business Financial Markets Series. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Shah, A. (1997). Competing exchanges: The international dimension. http://www.mayin.org/ajayshah/MEDIA/1997/cmarkets.html.

  39. Smith V. L. (1962) An experimental study of competitive market behaviour. Journal of Political Economy 70(2): 111–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sodomka, E., Collins, J., & Gini, M. L. (2007). Efficient statistical methods for evaluating trading agent performance. In Proceedings of the 27th conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 770–775). Canada: Vancouver.

  41. Stone P., Greenwald A. (2005) The first international trading agent competition: Autonomous bidding agents. Electronic Commerce Research 5(2): 229–265. doi:10.1007/s10660-005-6158-z

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  42. Sutton R. S., Barto A. G. (1998) Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  43. Vytelingum, P., Vetsikas, I. A., Shi, B., & Jennings, N. R. (2008). IAMwildCAT: The winning strategy for the TAC market design competition. In Proceedings of 18th European conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 428–434). Patras, Greece.

  44. Walsh, W., Das, R., Tesauro, G., & Kephart, J. O. (2002). Analyzing complex strategic interactions in multi-agent systems. In P. Gmytrasiewicz & S. Parsons (Eds.), Proceedings of 2002 workshop on game-theoretic and decision-theoretic agents (GTDT-02). AAAI, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

  45. Walsh, W. E., Parkes, D. C., & Das R. (2003). Choosing samples to compute heuristic-strategy Nash equilibrium. In AAMAS 2003 workshop on agent mediated electronic commerce. Melbourne, Australia.

  46. Wellman M. P., Cheng S. F., Reeves D. M., Lochner K. M. (2003) Trading agents competing: Performance, progress, and market effectiveness. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18(6): 48–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Widrow, B., & Hoff, M. E. (1960). Adaptive switching circuits. In 1960 IRE western electric show and convention record (pp. 96–104).

  48. Wurman P.R., Walsh W.E., Wellman M.P. (1998) Flexible double auctions for electronic commerce: Theory and implementation. Decision Support Systems 24(1): 17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wurman P. R., Wellman M. P., Walsh W. E. (2001) A parametrization of the auction design space. Games and Economic Behavior 35: 304–338

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhan W., Friedman D. (2007) Markups in double auction markets. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 31(9): 2984–3005

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Graduate Center, City University of New York, 365 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Jinzhong Niu & Kai Cai

  2. Department of Computer and Information Science, Brooklyn College, City University of New York, Brooklyn, NY, 11210, USA

    Simon Parsons

  3. Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L69 7ZF, UK

    Peter McBurney

  4. Department of Electronic and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK

    Enrico H. Gerding

Authors
  1. Jinzhong Niu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kai Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simon Parsons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter McBurney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Enrico H. Gerding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jinzhong Niu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Niu, J., Cai, K., Parsons, S. et al. What the 2007 TAC Market Design Game tells us about effective auction mechanisms. Auton Agent Multi-Agent Syst 21, 172–203 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9110-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-009-9110-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation