Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1812.10868

Detecting Multiple Seller Collusive Shill Bidding

Jarrod Trevathan·Claire Aitkenhead·Nazia Majadi·Wayne Read
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Shill bidding occurs when fake bids are introduced into an auction on the seller's behalf in order to artificially inflate the final price. This is typically achieved by the seller having friends bid in her auctions, or the seller controls multiple fake bidder accounts that are used for the sole purpose of shill bidding. We previously proposed a reputation system referred to as the Shill Score that indicates how likely a bidder is to be engaging in price inflating behaviour with regard to a specific seller's auctions. A potential bidder can observe the other bidders' Shill Scores, and if they are high, the bidder can elect not to participate as there is some evidence that shill bidding occurs in the seller's auctions. However, if a seller is in collusion with other sellers, or controls multiple seller accounts, she can spread the risk between the various sellers and can reduce suspicion on the shill bidder. Collusive seller behaviour impacts one of the characteristics of shill bidding the Shill Score is examining, therefore collusive behaviour can reduce a bidder's Shill Score. This paper extends the Shill Score to detect shill bidding where multiple sellers are working in collusion with each other. We propose an algorithm that provides evidence of whether groups of sellers are colluding. Based on how tight the association is between the sellers and the level of apparent shill bidding is occurring in the auctions, each participating bidder's Shill Score is adjusted appropriately to remove any advantages from seller collusion. Performance has been tested using simulated auction data and experimental results are presented.

Explore related subjects

cs.GT

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jarrod Trevathan, Claire Aitkenhead, Nazia Majadi, Wayne Read. 2018-12-28. Detecting Multiple Seller Collusive Shill Bidding. https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.10868

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT↗