Paper detail

Non-monetary fair scheduling---a cooperative game theory approach

We consider a multi-organizational system in which each organization contributes processors to the global pool but also jobs to be processed on the common resources. The fairness of the scheduling algorithm is essential for the stability and even for the existence of such systems (as organizations may refuse to join an unfair system). We consider on-line, non-clairvoyant scheduling of sequential jobs. The started jobs cannot be stopped, canceled, preempted, or moved to other processors. We consider identical processors, but most of our results can be extended to related or unrelated processors. We model the fair scheduling problem as a cooperative game and we use the Shapley value to determine the ideal fair schedule. In contrast to the current literature, we do not use money to assess the relative utilities of jobs. Instead, to calculate the contribution of an organization, we determine how the presence of this organization influences the performance of other organizations. Our approach can be used with arbitrary utility function (e.g., flow time, tardiness, resource utilization), but we argue that the utility function should be strategy resilient. The organizations should be discouraged from splitting, merging or delaying their jobs. We present the unique (to within a multiplicative and additive constants) strategy resilient utility function. We show that the problem of fair scheduling is NP-hard and hard to approximate. However, for unit-size jobs, we present an FPRAS. Also, we show that the problem parametrized with the number of organizations is FPT. Although for the large number of the organizations the problem is computationally hard, the presented exponential algorithm can be used as a fairness benchmark.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.