Club Formation by Rational Sharing : Content, Viability and Community Structure

W.-Y. Ng,D.M. Chiu,W.K. Lin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.cs/0509052
2005-09-18
Abstract:A sharing community prospers when participation and contribution are both high. We suggest the two, while being related decisions every peer makes, should be given separate rational bases. Considered as such, a basic issue is the viability of club formation, which necessitates the modelling of two major sources of heterogeneity, namely, peers and shared content. This viability perspective clearly explains why rational peers contribute (or free-ride when they don't) and how their collective action determines viability as well as the size of the club formed. It also exposes another fundamental source of limitation to club formation apart from free-riding, in the community structure in terms of the relation between peers' interest (demand) and sharing (supply).
Networking and Internet Architecture,Statistical Mechanics,Physics and Society
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The core problem that this paper attempts to solve is: **How to understand and model the motives of members' participation and contribution in P2P (peer - to - peer) sharing communities and their relationship with community content, so as to ensure the sustainable development and scale growth of the community?** Specifically, the paper explores the following key issues: 1. **Why do members participate and contribute?** - The paper proposes a view different from previous studies, that is, not only the heterogeneity among members (different interests and needs) should be considered, but also the heterogeneity of shared content. By introducing two new type variables - commodity type and member type, the paper explains why members choose to participate and contribute. 2. **The influence of community structure on formation** - The paper points out that in addition to the free - riding phenomenon, community structure (that is, the relationship between members' demands and supplies) is also an important factor restricting community formation. If there is not enough overlap between members' interests and the content they can provide, the community may fall into a deadlock state and cannot attract more members or content. 3. **Feasibility and stability** - By constructing the Information Sharing Club (ISC) model, the paper explores the feasibility conditions for community formation. In particular, the paper derives two feasibility conditions for judging whether an empty community can self - start and reach a stable and positive equilibrium state. ### Key formulas - **Member utility function**: \[ U_i(B_i, C_i) \] where \( B_i \) is the benefit obtained by the \( i \) - th member from the community, and \( C_i \) is his contribution cost. The utility function is a concave increasing function of the benefit and a decreasing function of the cost. - **Marginal exchange rate**: \[ \Gamma_i = -\frac{\partial U_i / \partial B_i}{\partial U_i / \partial C_i} \] This represents the maximum amount of contribution that a member is willing to make for an additional unit of benefit. - **Community response**: \[ \left( \frac{\partial B_i}{\partial C_i} \right)_{C_i = 0} \] It represents the degree of community response to member contributions in the initial state. - **Joining probability**: \[ P_i(n) = E_{h_i(s)}[1 - e^{-\rho_i\Phi(n)g(s)}] \] where \( h_i(s) \) is the demand distribution of the \( i \) - th member for different commodities, \( g(s) \) is the supply distribution of commodities in the community, and \(\Phi(n)\) is the total number of commodities in the community after \( n \) members join. - **Fixed - point equation**: \[ \bar{P}(n)N(n)=n \] It describes the condition of community scale \( n \) under statistical equilibrium. ### Summary By introducing the heterogeneity of members and content and constructing specific mathematical models, this paper reveals the internal mechanisms of the formation and development of P2P sharing communities. It not only explains why members participate and contribute, but also points out the influence of community structure on feasibility and stability. These findings are of great significance for designing effective incentive mechanisms to promote the healthy development of the community.