Source author record

Niloofar Bayat

Niloofar Bayat appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Bandwidth Allocation Games

Internet providers often offer data plans that, for each user's monthly billing cycle, guarantee a fixed amount of data at high rates until a byte threshold is reached, at which point the user's data rate is throttled to a lower rate for the remainder of the cycle. In practice, the thresholds and rates of throttling can appear and may be somewhat arbitrary. In this paper, we evaluate the choice of threshold and rate as an optimization problem (regret minimization) and demonstrate that intuitive formulations of client regret, which preserve desirable fairness properties, lead to optimization problems that have tractably computable solutions. We begin by exploring the effectiveness of using thresholding mechanisms to modulate overall bandwidth consumption. Next, we separately consider the regret of heterogeneous users who are {\em streamers}, wishing to view content over a finite period of fixed rates, and users who are {\em file downloaders}, desiring a fixed amount of bandwidth per month at their highest obtainable rate. We extend our analysis to a game-theoretic setting where users can choose from a variety of plans that vary the cap on the unbounded-rate data, and demonstrate the convergence of the game. Our model provides a fresh perspective on a fair allocation of resources where the demand is higher than capacity, while focusing on the real-world phenomena of bandwidth throttling practiced by ISPs. We show how the solution to the optimization problem results in allocations that exhibit several desirable fairness properties among the users between whom the capacity must be partitioned.

preprint2020arXiv

Zero-Rating and Net Neutrality: Who Wins, Who Loses?

An objective of network neutrality is that the design of regulations for the Internet will ensure that it remains a public, open platform where innovations can thrive. While there is broad agreement that preserving the content quality of service falls under the purview of net neutrality, the role of differential pricing, especially the practice of \emph {zero-rating} remains controversial. Even though some countries (India, Canada) have banned zero-rating, others have either taken no stance or explicitly allowed it (South Africa, Kenya, U.S.). In this paper, we model zero-rating options available between Internet service providers (ISPs) and content providers (CPs) and use these models to better understand the conditions under which offering zero-rated services are preferred, and who specifically gains in utility. We develop a formulation in which providers' incomes vary, from low-income startups to high-income incumbents, and where their decisions to zero-rate are a variation of the traditional prisoner's dilemma game. We find that if zero-rating is permitted, low-income CPs often lose utility, whereas high-income CPs often gain utility. We also study the competitiveness of the CP markets via the \emph{Herfindahl Index}. Our findings suggest that in most cases the introduction of zero-rating \emph{reduces} competitiveness.