Multi-Trust-Incentives: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
===Mathematical View === |
===Mathematical View === |
||
====One-Step-Matrix==== |
|||
The Evaluation of Trust between peers is measured in a Matrix M. This N * N matrix defines a onestep rank among peers. |
|||
All values are measured as the normalized download volume that a peer i has received from a peer j during a period. |
|||
====Two-Step-Matrix==== |
|||
A two-step-matrix <math>M^2</math> describes the relation in 3 levels. |
|||
===Implementation === |
===Implementation === |
||
Revision as of 10:20, 30 July 2007
Multi-Trust-Incentives
The major problem of private history based incentive systems is their coverage. Resolving it requires leveraging other reputable peers’ history which leads directly to the EigenTrust mechanism. Multi-Trust-Incentives try to mix both mechanisms.
Design of Multi-Trust-Incentives
Mathematical View
One-Step-Matrix
The Evaluation of Trust between peers is measured in a Matrix M. This N * N matrix defines a onestep rank among peers. All values are measured as the normalized download volume that a peer i has received from a peer j during a period.
Two-Step-Matrix
A two-step-matrix describes the relation in 3 levels.
