Proportional scheduling, split-proofness, and merge-proofness

Herve Moulin

Games and Economic Behavior, 2008, vol. 63, issue 2, 567-587

Abstract: If shortest (respectively longest) jobs are served first, splitting a job into smaller jobs (respectively merging several jobs) can reduce the actual wait. Any deterministic protocol is vulnerable to strategic splitting and/or merging. This is not true if scheduling is random, and users care only about expected wait. The Proportional rule draws the job served last with probabilities proportional to size, then repeats among the remaining jobs. It is immune to splitting and merging. Among split-proof protocols constructed in this recursive way, it is characterized by either one of three properties: job sizes and delays are co-monotonic; total delay is at most twice optimal delay; the worst (expected) delay of any job is at most twice the smallest feasible worst delay. A similar result holds within the family of separable rules,

Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (23)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899-8256(06)00122-9
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:63:y:2008:i:2:p:567-587

Access Statistics for this article

Games and Economic Behavior is currently edited by E. Kalai

More articles in Games and Economic Behavior from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().