the internet is a primary example of a large - scale , self organized , complex system .
understanding the processes that shape its topology would provide tools for engineering its future .
the internet is assembled out of multiple autonomous systems ( ass ) , which are contracted by different economic agreements .
these , in turn , compose the routing pathways among the ass . with some simplifications
, we can represent the resulting network as a graph , where two nodes ( ass ) are connected by a link if traffic is allowed to traverse through them .
the statistical properties of this `` internet graph '' , such as the clustering properties , degree distribution etc . , have been thoroughly investigated @xcite .
however , without proper understanding of the mechanism that led to this structure , the statistical analysis alone lacks the ability to either predict the future evolution of the internet nor to shape its evolution .    a large class of models , a primary example is the `` preferential attachment '' model @xcite , use probabilistic rules in order to simulate the network evolution and recover some of its statistical properties .
yet , these models fail to account for many other features of the network @xcite .
possibly , one of the main reasons for that is they treat the ass as passive elements rather than economic , profit - maximizing entities .
therefore , an agent - based approach is a promising alternative .
game theory is one of the main tools of the trade in estimating the performance of distributed algorithms @xcite .
it describes the behavior of interacting rational agents and the resulting equilibria .
game theory has been applied extensively to fundamental control tasks in communication networks , such as flow control @xcite , network security @xcite , routing @xcite and wireless network design @xcite .
recently , there has been increased activity in the field of _ network formation games_. these studies aim to understand the network structure that results from interactions between rational agents @xcite .
different authors emphasized different contexts , such as wireless networks @xcite or the inter - as topology @xcite .
the theme of such research is to investigate the equilibria s properties , e.g. , establishing their existence and obtaining bounds on the `` price of anarchy '' and  price of stability  .
these metrics measure from above and below , correspondingly , the social cost deterioration at an equilibrium compared with a ( socially ) optimal solution .
alternatively , agent - based simulations are used in order to obtain statistical characteristics of the resulting topology @xcite .
nonetheless , the vast majority of these studies assume that the players are identical , whereas the internet is a heterogeneous mixture of various entities , such as cdns , minor isps , tier-1 ass etc .
there are only a few studies that have explicitly considered the effects of heterogeneity on the network structure .
some examples include @xcite , which extends a previous model of formation games for directed networks @xcite , and in the context of social networks , @xcite .
the latter describes a network formation game in which the link costs are heterogeneous and the benefit depends only on a player s nearest neighbors ( i.e. , no spillovers ) .    most of the studies on the application of game theory to networks , with very few exceptions , e.g. , @xcite , focused on static properties of the game .
this is particularly true for network formation games .
however , it is not clear that the internet has reached an equilibrium .
indeed , ass continuously draw new contracts , some merge with others while other quit business .
in fact , a dynamic inspection of the inter - as network suggests that the system may be far from equilibrium .
therefore , a _ dynamic _ study of an inter - as network formation game is needed .
in addition , previous work ignores an important requirement that autonomous systems has - reliability .
indeed , failures occur , and an as must face such events .
while some game theoretic works addressed reliability in other contexts @xcite , to the best of our knowledge , there are no works that considered the _ topological properties _ that emerge in a _ heterogeneous , dynamic , _ network formation game with _ reliability constraints .
_    we establish an analytically - tractable model , which explicitly accounts for the heterogeneity of players as well as reliability requirements .
we base our model on the heralded fabrikant model @xcite , which was recently extended to include heterogeneous players @xcite .
we model the inter - as connectivity as a network formation game with _ heterogeneous _ players that may share costs by monetary transfers .
we account for the inherent bilateral nature of the agreements between players , by noting that the establishment of a link requires the agreement of both nodes at its ends , while removing a link can be done unilaterally . as
reliability comes into play , agents may require to be connected to other agents , or to all the other agents in the network , by at least two disjoint paths .
we investigate both the static properties of the resulting game as well as its dynamic evolution .
game theoretic analysis is dominantly employed as a `` toy model '' for contemplating about real - world phenomena .
it is rarely confronted with real - world data . in this study
we go a step further from traditional formal analysis , and we do consider real inter - as topology data analysis to support our theoretical findings .
the main contributions of our study are as follows :    * in the context of network formation games , we provide a theoretical framework that introduces reliability constraints .
we discuss both the case of frequent failures , where the fall - back pathways are as frequently used as the main pathways , as well as the case of rare crashes .
* we introduce the concept of _ price of reliability _ , which is defined as the ratio of the social cost with reliability constraints to the social cost with no such additional constraints .
surprisingly , we show that this price can be smaller than one , namely , that the additional reliability requirements may increase the social utility .
* we provide dynamical analysis of topological quantities , and explain the prevalence of some `` _ _ network motifs _ _ '' , i.e. , sub - graphs that appear frequently in the network . through real - world data
, we provide encouraging support to our predictions .    in the next section ,
we describe our model .
we discuss alternative variants that address different failure frequencies or whether utility transfers ( e.g. , monetary transfers ) are allowed or not ; we address both the case of allowing utility ( i.e. , monetary ) transfers as well as the case where this is not possible .
next , in section 3 , we provide static analysis .
dynamic analysis is presented in section 4 . in section 5
we compare our theoretical predictions with real - world data on inter - as topologies .
finally , conclusions are presented in section 6 .
we assume that each as is a player . while there are
many types of players , following @xcite , we aggregate them into two types : _ major league _ ( or t__ype - a _ _ ) players , such as major isps , central search engines and the likes , and _ minor league _ ( or _ type - b _ ) players , such as local isp or small enterprises .
each player , regardless of its type , may form contracts with other players , and should they reach a mutual understanding , a link between them is formed . a player s strategy is set by specifying which links it is interested in establishing , and , if permissible , the price it will be willing to pay for each . in order to maintain reliable routing pathways , players may be required to sustain at least _ two disjoint paths _ to other players or a subset of players .
we denote the set of type - a ( type b ) player by @xmath0 ( @xmath1 ) .
a link connecting node @xmath2 to node @xmath3 is denoted as either @xmath4 or @xmath5 .
the total number of players is @xmath6 , and we assume @xmath7 .
the _ shortest distance _ between nodes @xmath2 and @xmath3 is the minimal number of hops along a path connecting them and is denoted by @xmath8 .
finally , the degree of node @xmath2 is denoted by @xmath9 .
our cost function is based on the cost structure in @xcite and @xcite .
players are penalized for their distance from other players .
first and foremost , players require a good , fast connection to the major players , while they may relax their connection requirements to minor players .
bandwidth usage and delay depends heavily on the hop distance , and connection quality is represented by this metric . similarly to @xcite ,
we weight the relative importance of a major player by a factor @xmath10 in the cost function in the corresponding distance term .
the link prices represent factors such as the links maintenance costs , bandwidth allocation costs etc .
different player types may incur different link costs , @xmath11 , due to varying financial resources or infrastructure .
all ass must maintain access to the internet in case of a single link failure .
this is tantamount to the requirement that all the players must have at least two _ disjoint _ paths to each other node . nevertheless ,
if either link prices are high , crash frequencies are low or the content of a minor as is of little value , players may relax their reliability requirements and demand the establishment of disjoint paths only to the major players .
this is represented in the cost function by a control parameter @xmath12 , which is set to one if two disjoint paths are required to all nodes , and zero if the requirement holds for ( other ) nodes of major players only .
conversely , if failures are often , then the regular and backup paths ( in the corresponding pair of disjoint paths ) are used almost as frequently . as such , they must be weighted the same in the cost function .
therefore , the distance cost is composed of two terms , one represents the distance along the primary path and the other represents the distance along the backup path .
the relative weight of these two terms is set by a parameter @xmath13 if failures are frequent and the likelihood of using either route is the same , we have @xmath14 .
however , if failures are rare , traffic will be mostly carried across the shorter path .
therefore its length should carry more weight in the cost than the length of the backup route , hence @xmath15 .
this motivates the following cost function .
two paths , @xmath16 and @xmath17 are disjoint if they have no node in common , namely if the unordered sets satisfy @xmath18    the cost function @xmath19 of node @xmath2 of type @xmath20 , is defined as:[cost - definition ] @xmath21    where @xmath8 and @xmath22 are the lengths of a pair of disjoint paths between @xmath23 that minimizes the cost function .
@xmath8 denotes the length of the shorter path .
formally , denote a pair of disjoint paths connecting player @xmath2 and player @xmath3 as @xmath24 , where @xmath25 @xmath26 is the length of shorter ( correspondingly , longer ) path . set @xmath27 then @xmath28 and @xmath29 .
if there is not pair of disjoint path player @xmath2 and player @xmath3 , then @xmath30 , with @xmath31if there is not a path connecting players @xmath2 and @xmath3 we also have @xmath32    for convenience , we set @xmath33 .
we assume @xmath34 the social cost is the sum of individual costs , @xmath35 .
we denote the optimal ( minimal ) social cost as @xmath36 _ _ , _ _ and the social cost at the optimal stable solution is @xmath37 .
the _ price of stability _ is the ratio between the social cost at the best stable solution and its value at the optimal solution , namely @xmath38 .
similarly , denote by @xmath39 the highest social cost in an equilibrium .
then , the _ price of anarchy _ is the ratio between the social cost at the worst stable solution and its value at the optimal solution , namely @xmath40 .
note that the requirement of disjoint _ node _ paths generalizes the requirement of disjoint _ link _ paths and protects against link failures within an autonomous system .
all of our results apply to both notions of disjoint path ( except a refinement of theorem [ thm : symmetric dynamic ] ; see the discussion there ) . for simplicity and generality
we shall use the notion of a disjoint node paths .
we denote the change in cost of player @xmath2 as after the addition ( removal ) of a link @xmath41 by @xmath42 ( correspondingly , @xmath43 ) . the abbreviation @xmath44 is often used .
if @xmath14 , then the two routing pathways are used the same . in this case ,
the shortest cycle length @xmath45 is the relevant quantity that appears in the cost function .
this can be found in polynomial time by using suurballe s algorithm @xcite .
however , if @xmath15 , routing will occurs along two disjoint paths , such that the length of the shortest between the two is shortest ( among all pairs of disjoint paths ) .
although the complexity of finding this pair is np - hard , first finding the shortest path and then finding the next shortest path is a heuristic that works remarkably well , both in the real - world data analysis and on the networks obtained in the theoretical discussion .
the reason behind this is that , when failures are rare , information is predominantly routed along the shortest path .
when players are required to establish a fall - back route , they will establish a path that is disjoint from the _ current _ routing path , namely the shortest one .
the establishment of a link requires the bilateral agreement of the two parties at its ends , while removing a link can be done unilaterally .
this is known as a _ pairwise - stable _ equilibrium@xcite .
the players strategies are _ pairwise - stable _ if for all @xmath46 , the following hold :    \a ) if @xmath47 , then @xmath48 ;    \b ) if @xmath49 , then either @xmath50 or @xmath51 .
the resulting graph is referred to as a _
stabilizable _ graph .
the additional reliability requirements result in additional link expenses , as for example , the degree of every node needs to be at least two .
the _ price of reliability _ is the ratio between the optimal social cost under the additional survivability constraint to the optimal social cost when the additional constraints are removed .
the cost function,@xmath52 , of node @xmath2 of type @xmath20 , is obtained by setting @xmath53 in definition [ cost - definition ] and requiring the existence of only a _
path from player @xmath2 to any other players in the network .
denote the optimal social cost without the additional survivability requirement in a pairwise stable equilibrium as @xmath54 .
the _ price of reliability _ ( _ por ) _ is the ratio between the optimal value of the social costs among the set of stable equilibria , @xmath55 .
surprisingly , we shall show that there exist scenarios in which reliability requirements _ increase _ the social utility , so that the price of reliability can be smaller than one .
thus far , it was implicitly assumed that utility transfer is not feasible . nevertheless , often players are able to transfer utility , for example via monetary transactions . an extended model that incorporates such transfers
is introduced by allowing for a monetary transaction in which player @xmath2 pays player @xmath3 some amount @xmath56 iff the link @xmath57 is established @xcite .
player @xmath3 sets some minimal price @xmath58 and should @xmath59 the link is formed .
[ monetary cost definition]the cost function of player @xmath2 when monetary transfers are allowed is @xmath60 .
we recall the observation in @xcite that , without transfers , a link will be established only if _ both _ parties , @xmath2 and @xmath3 , reduce their costs , @xmath61 and @xmath62 .
but , when monetary transfers are allowed , an edge will be established if ( and only if ) the relaxed condition @xmath63 holds . in game theoretic terms , this condition is equivalent to the requirement that the _ core _ of the two players game is non - empty .    _ _    in the remainder of the paper , whenever monetary transfers are feasible , we will state it explicitly , otherwise the basic model ( without transfers ) is assumed .
we shall now analyze the properties of stable equilibria , such as the _ price of anarchy _ , which is the ratio between the social cost at the worst stable solution and its value at the optimal solution , and the _ price of stability _
, which is the ratio between the social cost at the best stable solution and its value at the optimal solution . we shall further discuss topological properties that emerge from our analysis .
it was shown in @xcite that if @xmath64 the only stable solution is a clique and in @xcite it was shown that if @xmath65 then the major players form a clique .
one may have guessed that reliability requirements , which generally induce the creation of additional , backup edges , would ease the formation of the clique .
the next proposition shows that this naive assumption is wrong , and in fact , as the frequency of failure increases , it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain the major player s clique .
consider a dense set , in which every player may access all the other players within two hops by a at least two disjoint paths .
a direct link between two players only reduces their mutual distance by one , and does not affect any other distance . if this link fails often , it may be used only partially , and it may not be worthy to pay its cost .
hence , in this setting , counter intuitively , frequent failures end up with a sparser network .
assume the frequency of failures is high , namely @xmath66 then , the type - a players form a clique if and only if @xmath67 .
allowing monetary transfers does not change the result .
we consider a major player s clique and ask under which conditions the removal of a link is a worthy move . consider an edge @xmath4 in this clique .
since only the shortest distance between players @xmath2 and @xmath3 is affected , and is increased by one , the type - a players clique is stable if and only if @xmath68 .    as the major players ( tier-1 as ) form a densely connected set , a clique - like subgraph , in the rest of the paper we shall only consider the case where @xmath67 .
we also assume , trivially , that @xmath69 , as otherwise the only stabilizable network is a clique .
the next proposition describes a scenario in which , surprisingly , the additional reliability constraints _ reduce _ the social cost .
the optimal solution when @xmath70 and @xmath71 , according to prop .
[ lem : reliable optimal 1 ] .
the type - b players are in red circles .
the type - a clique is in blue squares . ]
[ lem : reliable optimal 1 ] assume @xmath70 and symmetric reliability requirements , namely @xmath71 .
then , the optimal network is composed of a type - a clique , where all the type @xmath72 nodes are connected to all members of the type - a clique , as depicted in fig .
[ fig : the - optimal - solution ] .
this network is not stabilizable , and @xmath73 . nevertheless , for @xmath74 , we have @xmath75 . in addition , the price of reliability is smaller than one .
the main idea behind this result is that in the optimal , yet unstable solution , every minor player establishes a link with all the major players ( fig .
[ fig : the - optimal - solution ] ) .
this configuration is unstable as it is over - saturated with links , and the optimal stable solution is obtained by diluting this network so that every minor player will connect to just two major players . if the reliability requirements are further removed , then additional dilution occurs , increasing the social cost . in other words ,
the stable configuration is under - saturated with edges , and the additional survivability requirements facilitate the formation of additional links .
  we shall now prove the first part of this theorem , namely that the network described in fig . [
fig : the - optimal - solution ] , is optimal in terms of social cost . in this network
, every type - b player is connected to every type - a player .
we denote this network by @xmath76    first , consider a network in which the type - a players are not in a clique .
then , there exists two players @xmath77 such that @xmath78 . by establishing a link @xmath4
the change in social cost is @xmath79 therefore a network which includes this link has a lower social cost .
hence , in the optimal network , all the type - a players are in clique .
a similar calculation for a missing link between player @xmath80 and @xmath81 shows that @xmath82    and establishing this link reduces the social cost as well . in conclusion , in an optimal network a type - a player is connected to all the other players .
consider node @xmath83 its distance from every other node @xmath81 is @xmath84 and @xmath85 .
the minimal distances between two minor players @xmath86 are @xmath87 and @xmath85 whereas in @xmath88 we have @xmath89 .
assume that a network with a lower social cost exists , and denote it by @xmath90 . in @xmath90 there must exists a link between two type - b players , @xmath86 .
however , removing this link reduces the social cost , as    @xmath91 therefore , @xmath90 is not optimal , in contradiction to our assumption .
this proves that @xmath88 is optimal .
next , we are going to show @xmath88 is unstable .
consider @xmath92 and @xmath93 . by removing @xmath94
we cost change of player @xmath95 is @xmath96    and therefore it is beneficial for player @xmath95 to remove this link .
hence , this network in not stabilizable .
finally , we are going to show that the @xmath97 .
the outline is as follows .
first , we are going to show that the network depicted in fig .
@xmath98 is stable .
the optimal stable network ( without reliability requirements ) in this parameter regime was explicitly derived in @xcite .
we are going to show that the cost in the latter network is higher than the former , which bound the @xmath99 from above by a value smaller than one .
consider a network in which all the minor players are connected to two major players , @xmath100 .
we are going to show that this network is stable .
clearly , as shown before , the type - a clique is stable .
in addition , for any player @xmath92 neither @xmath101 nor @xmath2 has the incentive to remove either @xmath102 or @xmath103 as it would violate the reliability requirement and would lead to unbounded cost .
hence , this network is stable .
denote this network by @xmath104 in @xcite it was shown that the optimal stable network ( without reliability requirements ) in this configuration is the network in which all type - a players form a clique , and all the type - b players are connected to a single type - a player .
we denote the latter network by @xmath105we have @xmath106    but , @xmath107    this concludes the proof .    in conclusion ,
if the failure frequency is high , the survivability requirements will induce dilution of the clique of major players .
however , the opposite effect occurs along the graph cut - set between the set of minor players and the set of major players , where the additional constraints lead to an increased number of links connecting major and minor players .
so far we have assumed that the reliability requirements are symmetric .
as explained in the introduction , in some cases it is reasonable to assume that players will require a backup route only to the major players , i.e. , non - symmetric reliability constraints .
we shall now show that in this case , the social cost may deteriorate considerably .
hence , from a system designer point of view , it is much more important to incentivize a configuration where the reliability requirements are symmetric , than to reduce failure frequency globally .
this result stems from the following lemma .
[ lem : finite distances]if @xmath108 then for every two nodes i , j , @xmath109 .
if @xmath110 there exists stable equiliberia such that there are no two disjoint paths between some nodes @xmath23 .
first , we are going to show that @xmath22 is finite ( step 1 ) .
then , in the second step , we shall bound @xmath22 from above .
note , that if there are nt two disjoint paths between players @xmath2 and @xmath3 , it is beneficial for both players to add the link @xmath4 and form a path .
step 1 : if @xmath2 and @xmath3 are disconnected , then it is worthy for both of them to establish the link @xmath4 . therefore , there exists a path from @xmath2 to @xmath3 and @xmath8 is finite .
assume @xmath111 . if there are nt two disjoint paths between nodes @xmath2 and @xmath112 it is worthy for both nodes to establish a direct link .
hence if @xmath111 the distance @xmath22 is finite .
we now discuss the case @xmath87 and show there must exists an additional disjoint path , so @xmath22 is finite .
we prove by negation .
take node @xmath113 .
as before , both @xmath114 and @xmath115 are finite .
consider the following two cases :    \a ) @xmath116 , @xmath117 .
then , the trajectory @xmath118 is disjoint from the path @xmath4 , and it is therefore worthy for both player @xmath2 and player @xmath3 to establish the link @xmath119 hence @xmath22 is finite .
\b ) @xmath116 , @xmath120 or @xmath121 , @xmath117 . without loss of generality
, we assume the first case . according to the previous discussion
, there are at least two disjoint paths from @xmath95 to @xmath122 since they are disjoint , only one of them may contain the edge @xmath4 .
therefore , there exist a path @xmath123 that is disjoint from the edge @xmath4 and therefore @xmath22 is finite .
\c ) @xmath121 , @xmath120 .
applying the same reasoning as in b ) , there exists a path from @xmath2 to @xmath95 that is disjoint from the edge @xmath4 .
likewise , there exists a path from @xmath3 to @xmath95 that is disjoint from the edge @xmath119 therefore there exist a path from @xmath2 to @xmath3 that is disjoint from @xmath119    step 2 : step 1 has shown that every two nodes are connected by a cycle .
let us assume the longest shortest cycle connecting two nodes is of length @xmath124 , namely there exists a cycle @xmath125 .
by establishing the link @xmath126 the cost of player @xmath127 due to distances from other players is reduced by at least @xmath128 , hence the link will be established as @xmath129    and similarly @xmath130 . since @xmath131 the proof is complete .
if there exist players with no two disjoint paths in an equilibrium , then the social cost becomes unbounded .
this immediately results in an _ unbounded _ price of anarchy , as indicated by the following theorem .
[ thm : price of anarchy]consider a network such that @xmath132 .
the price of anarchy is as follows :    \a ) in a setting with asymmetric reliability requirements @xmath133 : unbounded .
\b ) in a setting with symmetric reliability requirements @xmath134 : bounded by @xmath135 .
\a ) we shall prove this by showing that there exists a stable equilibrium with unbounded social cost .
consider a network in which the major players ( type - a players ) form a clique , while every minor player is connected only to a single type - a player @xmath136 .
we shall show that this network is stabilizable . as discusses before ,
the type - a clique is stable .
consider @xmath83 by forming the link @xmath94 the change of cost of player @xmath93 , @xmath137 is @xmath138    hence , this link will be formed .
no additional links between minor players will be established , since such a link only reduces the distance between the participating parties by one , @xmath139 and does not provide an additional disjoint path to the type - a clique .
therefore , the social cost is @xmath140 .
\b ) the total cost due to the inter - connectivity of the type - a clique is identical for all link stable equilibria and is @xmath141 .
this cost is composed of @xmath142 links per node , and the distance cost to every other major nodes , @xmath143 next , we evaluate the cost due to the type - b nodes inter - distances . according to lemma [ lem : finite distances ] ,
both @xmath144 and @xmath145 , so the cost due to the inter - distances between a type - b player and every other player is bounded from above by @xmath146 . when summed up over all minor players ,
this contributes a term @xmath147 to the social cost .
likewise , the cost of links that at least one of their ends is a type b player is at most @xmath148 .    therefore , the maximal cost in all link stable equilibria is bounded from above by @xmath149    the optimal network configuration is described in proposition [ lem : reliable optimal 1 ] .
it is straightforward to evaluate the social cost in this configuration .
the distance cost due to inter - distances of the type - b players is @xmath150    while the cost of all links which connect type - b players to type - a players is @xmath151    finally , the social cost due to the type - a clique remains the same , so finally we obtain that the minimal social cost is    @xmath152    by taking the limits @xmath153 we obtain that @xmath154
.    a stable equilibrium with infinite social cost can be easily achieved by considering a network where all minor players are connected to a single , designated , major player .
there exists a single path of at most two hops between every minor player to every major player .
however , as the stability requirements are asymmetric , the major players have no incentive to establish additional routes to any minor player , and the reliability requirements of the minor players remain unsatisfied .      the previous discussion assumed that a player can not compensate other players for an increase in their costs . yet
, contracts between ass often do involve monetary transactions .
accordingly , in this subsection we shall highlight the additional insights that are obtained when utility transfers are permissible .
our first result indicates that , in this setting , in contrast to the previous setting , there always exists a fallback route between every two players , regardless of the symmetric or asymmetric nature of the additional survivability constraints .
if monetary transfers are feasible , players may compensate other players for the cost of additional links such that all the additional constraints are satisfied .
hence , symmetry is less important than in the previous scenario .
furthermore , this result suggests that every player is connected to every other player by a cycle .
the following proposition shows that the maximal cycle length decays with the number of major players .
as the number of ass increases in time , this predicts that this length should decrease in time .
we shall verify this prediction in section [ sec : data - analysis ] .
[ prop : max distance]assume @xmath155 .
then , every two players are connected by a cycle , and the maximal cycle length connecting a major player to a minor player is bounded by @xmath156    _ _ lemma [ lem : finite distances ] showed that the maximal distance between players is bounded .
we are going to tighten this result in the regime where monetary transfers are feasible .
denote the maximal distance between type - a player and a type_b player by @xmath157 .
_ _    _ _ first , we are going to show that the maximal cycle length connecting a major player and a minor player is @xmath158 this follows from a simple geometric argument .
consider two players , @xmath80 and @xmath81 .
assume @xmath159 .
if the cycle length is @xmath160 or greater , there exists a type - b node that its distance @xmath161 in contradiction to the assumption that the maximal distance between a major player and and a minor player is @xmath157 .
denote maximal distance between two minor players by @xmath162 a similar argument shows that maximal cycle length between two minor players is @xmath163 .
_ _    _ _ next , are going to show that the maximal distance connecting a major player and a minor player is @xmath164 .
we prove by negation .
assume that the distance between player @xmath136 and @xmath92 is @xmath165 .
denote the nodes on the path as @xmath166 .
then , by establishing a link between them , the distance between @xmath3 and @xmath167 ( similarly , and distance between player @xmath2 and players @xmath168 ) is reduced .
in addition , player @xmath2 reduces its distance to every node of the type - a clique by @xmath165 .
lemma 25 of @xcite shows that the total reduction in distance is @xmath128 .
then , by establishing the link @xmath4 we have @xmath169 _ _    _ _ and as @xmath170 this expression is negative .
therefore , the link will be established , and the maximal shortest distance between a major player and a minor player is smaller than @xmath165 .
this concludes the proof . _
_    our second result is based on the first one , and shows that the price of anarchy is bounded .
in fact , as the network grows , proposition [ prop : max distance ] also indicates that its diameter _
shrinks_. therefore , in the large network limit , the price of anarchy is bounded by a constant .
the price of anarchy is bounded by @xmath135 .
furthermore , if @xmath171 then the price of anarchy is upper bounded by 2 .    in proposition [ prop : max distance ]
s proof we showed that the maximal distance between a major player a minor player is bounded by @xmath172    it immediately follows that in the large network limit , as @xmath173 , every player is directly connected to a player that , in turn is connected to the type - a players .
the latter can be either a major player , as part of the clique , or a minor player that is connected to every player in the major player s clique .
note that a link between any two players @xmath174 and @xmath175 reduces the social cost , since it at least lowers the costs of @xmath174 of @xmath175 and can only reduce the costs of other players .
therefore , we can bound the social cost by a configuration in which every type - b player has the minimal number of links , namely two , is at distance two from every major player .    therefore , the worst social cost in bounded by @xmath176    comparing this bound with @xmath36 , as derived in proposition [ lem : reliable optimal 1 ] , in the limit @xmath153 completes the proof .
the internet undergoes continuous transformations , such as the emergence of new ass , or formation of new traffic contracts .
in fact , it may very well be out of equilibrium .
therefore , a static analysis of the equilibrium points must be accompanied by dynamic analysis . accordingly , our main focus in this section is to identify prevalent network motifs @xcite , i.e. , small sub - graphs that emerge during the natural evolution of the network . in section [ sec : data - analysis ] we shall show that these motifs are indeed ubiquitous in the real as topology , and the frequency of their occurrences is few folds _ _ more than expected in a random network .    while there are many possible equiliberia
, we shall show that convergence occurs only to _ just a few_. we shall also show that the convergence time is short , namely _ linear _ in the number of players .
we start the discussion by setting up the dynamic framework , as first formulated in @xcite .
we split the game into _ turns _ , where at each turn only a single player is allowed to remove or initiate the formation of links . at each point in time , or turn , the players that already joined the game form a subset @xmath177 .
we shall implicitly assume that the cost function is calculated with respect to the set @xmath178 of players that are already present in the network .
each turn is divided into _ moves , _ at each of which a player either forms or removes a single link .
a player s turn is over when it has no incentive to perform additional moves .
note that disconnections of several links can be done unilaterally and hence iteratively .
dynamic rule # 1 : in player @xmath2 s turn it may choose to move @xmath179 times . in each move , it may remove a link @xmath180 or , if player @xmath3 agrees , it may establish the link @xmath4 .
player @xmath3 would agree to establish @xmath4 iff @xmath181 .    according to this definition , during player s @xmath2 turn
, all the other players will act in a greedy , rather than strategic , manner .
for example , although it may be that player @xmath3 prefers that a link @xmath182 would be established for some @xmath183 , if we adopt dynamic rule # 1 it will accept the establishment of the less favorable link @xmath119 in other words , the active player has the advantage of initiation and the other players react to its offers .
there are numerous scenarios in which players can not fully forecast other players moves and offers , e.g. , when information is asymmetric or when only partial information is available @xcite . in these settings , it is likely that a greedy strategy will become the modus operandi of many players .
this is a prevalent strategy also when the system evolves rapidly and it is difficult to assess the current network state and dynamics .    in a dynamic network formation game ,
a key question is : can a player temporarily disconnects itself from the graph , only to reconnect after getting to a better bargaining position ? or must a player stay connected ?
if the timescale in which the costs are evaluated is comparable to the timescale in which the dynamics occur , then , clearly , a player will not disconnect from the network voluntarily .
however , if the latter is much shorter , it may , for a very brief time , disconnect itself from the graph in order to perform some strategic move .
the following rules address the two alternative limits .
dynamic rule # 2a : let the set of links at the current move @xmath184 be denoted as @xmath185 .
a link @xmath4 will be added if @xmath2 asks to form this link and @xmath186 .
in addition , any link @xmath4 can be removed in move @xmath187    dynamic rule # 2b : in addition to dynamic rule # 2a , player @xmath2 would only remove a link @xmath4 if @xmath188 and would establish a link if both @xmath186 and @xmath189    according to dynamic rule # 2a , a player is allowed to perform a strategic plan in which the first few steps will increase its cost , as long as when the plan is completed its cost will be reduced . on the other hand ,
if the game follows dynamic rule # 2b , then a player s cost must be reduced _ at each move _ , hence such multi - move plan is not possible .
our first result in this section shows that , during the natural evolution of the network , a `` double star '' sub - graph , or network motif , often emerges . in the `` double star '' motif , as depicted in fig .
[ fig : generalized star 2 ] , there exists a primary and a secondary star .
all the minor players are connected to the primary star s center .
part of the players are also connected to the other star s center , forming the secondary star .
consider a region where it is immensely difficult to establish a link to a major player , either due to geographical distance , link prices or perhaps additional physical links are simply not accessible .
nevertheless , in order to maintain a reliable connection , there must be at least two links that connect this region to the internet backbone via some major players . in order to provide a stable , fault tolerant service ,
every player in this region will form links with the players hosting the endpoints of these links , forming the double star sub - graph .
assume now that link prices reduce over time , or that the importance of a fast connection to the internet core increases in time .
in this case , players may decide to establish direct links with the major players , and remove either one of both links connecting them to the star centers .
note though , that players will be reluctant to disconnect from the star center if the number of nodes in the star is large .    a network configuration which includes a `` double - star '' structure of minor players .
every node in the primary star ( encircled in yellow ) is linked to a major player , node @xmath190 ( in green ) .
a direct link connects the two star centers , denoted by 1 and 2 ( in pink ) .
the members in the secondary star ( in purple ) are connected to both star centers .
in addition , there secondary star center is also connected to the major player @xmath190
. there might be additional minor players outside the stars ( in red ) .
needless to say , the type - a clique ( square boxes ) is also present . ]
moreover , the next theorem also shows that , eventually , and fairly quickly , the system will converge to either the optimal stable state , or to a state in which the social cost is a low multiple of the optimal social cost .
[ thm : symmetric dynamic]assume symmetric reliability requirements , i.e. , @xmath71 .
if the players follow dynamic rules # 1 and # 2a , then , in any playing order :    \a ) the system converges to either the optimal stable state , depicted in fig .
[ fig : optimal and stable ] , or to the network depicted in fig .
[ fig : generalized star 2 ] .
\b ) in the large network limit , namely , when @xmath74 , the social costs ratio satisfy @xmath191 , with @xmath192 .
\c ) if players play in a uniformly random order , the probability that the system has not converged by turn @xmath193 decays exponentially with @xmath193 .
otherwise , if every player plays at least once in o(n ) turns , convergence occurs after o(n ) steps .
we claim that the network , at any time , has the following structure ( fig . [ fig : generalized star 2 ] ) : a type - a players clique , and _ at most _ two type - b star centers @xmath194 .
the larger ball s center is labelled as @xmath195 , and the smaller is @xmath196 .
we denote the set of type - b players which are members of the star centered about node 1 ( 2 ) as @xmath197 and ( correspondingly , @xmath198 ) .
we have @xmath199 in addition , some type - b players might be linked to two nodes @xmath200 , the set of these type - b players is denoted by @xmath201 .
the set of type - a players that have a direct link with the star center @xmath195 ( star center @xmath196 ) is denoted by @xmath202 ( correspondingly @xmath203 ) .
players @xmath204 form a clique .
assuming the second star exists , it is connected to either players @xmath195 or @xmath205 ( or both ) .
finally , there may be additional links between players is @xmath201 and @xmath203 .
an example of this network structure is presented in fig .
[ fig : generalized star 2 ] .
.[tab : d(i , k)]the shortest distance @xmath8 between two nodes , as discussed in prop .
[ thm : symmetric dynamic ] .
note that if @xmath206 , than column 9 applies instead of column 8 for @xmath207 .
[ cols="^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     we prove by induction . after the first three players played
the induction base case is true .
we first assume that the link @xmath208 and consider the case @xmath209 later . denote the active player by @xmath210 .
consider the following cases :    \1 .
@xmath211 : as @xmath212 , @xmath210 will form ( or maintain ) links with every type - a player .
if additional links to minor players are to be formed , it is clearly better for player @xmath210 to establish links first with either player @xmath195 or player @xmath196 than to any player in @xmath213 or @xmath207 .
we first consider the case where @xmath214 and split into two cases :    1a ) if no two disjoint paths exists between player @xmath210 to players @xmath195 or @xmath196 , namely , if @xmath215 and either @xmath216 or @xmath217 , then it is beneficial for both @xmath210 and the star centers to link such that reliability requirements will be satisfied .
1b ) if @xmath218 then by establishing the edge @xmath219 we have @xmath220    while by establishing @xmath221 the change of cost is :    @xmath222    as @xmath223 , player @xmath210 will prefer to establish first a link with player 1 rather than with player 2 .
the link will be formed if @xmath224 , which is true if @xmath225 if condition [ eq:2r edge ] holds , then player @xmath210 will attempt to form a link with the star center @xmath196 , and succeed if condition [ eq : a - b link condition ] holds as well .
establishing a link to any other type - b node is clearly an inferior option , as if a player had decided to establish links with either node @xmath195 or node @xmath226 an additional link to one of their leafs will only reduce the distance to it by 1 and hence is not a worthy course of action .
therefore , @xmath227 .
\2 . @xmath228 and @xmath229 .
a player may disconnect itself and then choose its two optimal links .
clearly , among the type - a clique , player @xmath230 best candidates are players @xmath231 , while among the type - b players , the cost reduction is maximal by linking to nodes @xmath232 .
in addition , a link to node @xmath190 is at least as preferred a link to @xmath205 , while a link to node 1 is always preferred over a link to node @xmath196 as long as @xmath233 .
therefore , we only need to consider three possible moves by player @xmath210 - linking to @xmath231 ( the red players in fig .
[ fig : generalized star 2 ] ) , linking to @xmath234 or linking to @xmath232 .
using tables [ tab : d(i , k ) ] and [ tab : d(i , k ) ] we can compare the cost of connecting to nodes @xmath232 versus the costs of connecting to nodes @xmath195 and @xmath190 .
a simple calculation shows that if the expression @xmath235    is positive , than linking to players @xmath195 and @xmath190 is preferred over linking to player @xmath195 and @xmath196 .
this expression is positive , as @xmath236 and @xmath223 .    in a similar fashion
, we can compare between the choices of linking to nodes @xmath195 and @xmath190 or forming links with nodes @xmath190 and @xmath237 if the expression @xmath238    is positive , then establishing links to @xmath195 and @xmath190 is preferred , otherwise the alternative will be chosen .
two special cases are of interest : if @xmath239 and @xmath240 , then every player will prefer to link to @xmath190 and @xmath205 .
that is , we ll get the optimal configuration . if @xmath14 , @xmath241 , i.e , node 1 is a member of the clique , @xmath242 and @xmath243 , then a minor player will connect to players @xmath195 and @xmath190 .
note that if there are no type - a players present when @xmath210 plays , then it must connect to the star centers @xmath195 and @xmath196 .
in addition , after @xmath210 formed two links , no player @xmath244 will agree to form the link @xmath245 , as the induced change of cost is @xmath246 if @xmath247 and @xmath248 then player @xmath249 and player @xmath250 will establish the link @xmath245 .
by symmetry , this also happens when @xmath251 and @xmath252 .
if @xmath253 then it must maintain links to all nodes in @xmath254 ( if there are any ) in order to satisfy the reliability criteria .
additional links to type - a players will be formed according to the discussion in case 1 , while no other links to type - b player will be formed according to the discussion in case 2 .
\4 . if @xmath255
, then it must maintain links to all nodes in @xmath198 ( if there are any ) in order to satisfy the reliability criteria .
a similar calculation to the one in case @xmath196 shows that player @xmath196 s best course of action is to remain connected to player    in order to complete the induction proof all that is left is to address the case @xmath209 . in this case ,
player @xmath196 must be connected to at least one additional player @xmath256 in order to have two disjoint path to every player in the network .
clearly , its optimal choice is player @xmath205 . in order to maintain reliable path to every @xmath257 player
@xmath205 must agree to form this link .
player @xmath196 will disconnect @xmath208 if either @xmath258 or @xmath259 .
however , if either of this conditions hold , tables [ tab : d(i , k ) ] and [ tab : d(i , k ) ] shows that for every @xmath260 , it would prefer to link to player @xmath205 rather than player @xmath196 . in particular
, this is also true for every node @xmath207 .
therefore , as soon as every member in @xmath198 played once , the star will be empty and no additional star will raise again
. therefore , there will be at most one star left in the network .
this completes the proof on the momentarily structure of the network .
note that if @xmath261 we obtain the optimal stable solution .
\b ) since every minor player has either two or three links , the contribution to the social cost due to minor players links is @xmath262 while the contribution to the social costs due to the inter - distances between minor players is @xmath263 . in the limit @xmath153 ,
the dominant term in the cost function is the term proportional to @xmath264 .
both @xmath8 and @xmath22 for @xmath86 are bounded by @xmath265 , and comparing this results with the optimal social cost ( proposition [ lem : reliable optimal 1 ] ) we have @xmath266    with @xmath192 in the limit @xmath153 .
\c ) the discussion of case 2 shows that in a large network , it is suboptimal for a minor player to be a member of @xmath198 .
given the the opportunity , it will prefer to become a member in either @xmath197 or @xmath201 .
therefore , after every player has played at least twice , @xmath267 , and after every player has played four times the system will reach equilibrium .
lemma 13 in @xcite then shows that the probability that the system has not converged by turn @xmath193 decays exponentially with @xmath193 .    the optimal stable network , as described in theorem [ thm : symmetric dynamic ] . ]    in section [ sec : static - analysis ] we emphasized the importance of symmetry in the reliability requirements for reducing the price of anarchy .
the next theorem affirms this assertion , and shows that if the constraints are asymmetric , the system converges to a state with an unbounded social cost on a large set of possible dynamics and initial conditions .
[ thm : dynamic asymetric]assume asymmetric reliability requirements , namely @xmath110 .
if the players follow dynamic rules # 1 and either dynamic rule # 2a or # 2b , then the system converges to a state with an unbounded social cost .    the idea behind the proof is to show that the reliability requirements of at least one minor player remain unsatisfied , the therefore the social costs , as a sum over individual costs , is unbounded .
first assume that @xmath268 .
we shall now show that at any given turn , the network is composed of a type - a ( possibly empty ) clique , a set of type - b players @xmath269 linked to player @xmath95 , acting as a star center , and an additional ( possibly empty ) set of type - b players @xmath201 connected to the type - a player @xmath190 .
player @xmath95 is also connected to player @xmath190 .
some major player may establish links with the star center @xmath270 the set of these major players is denoted by @xmath271 .
note that the cost of every player in either @xmath269 or @xmath201 is @xmath272 , since every path from each of these players to the type - a clique crosses player @xmath190 .
we prove by induction . at turn
@xmath273 , this is certainly true .
denote the active player at time @xmath193 as @xmath274 consider the following cases :    \1 .
@xmath211 : since @xmath275 all links to the other type - a nodes will be established or maintained , if @xmath210 is already connected to the network . clearly , the optimal link in @xmath210 s concern is the link with the star center @xmath95 .
therefore , player @xmath210 will attempt to establish the link @xmath276 if @xmath277 is negative .
if @xmath278 or that @xmath279 then @xmath95 will accept this link . regardless , if player @xmath210 has formed the link it will not establish a link with @xmath280 , as it only reduces its distance to player @xmath2 by a single hop , and @xmath281    if eq .
[ eq : term1 ] is positive , then , player @xmath210 has no incentive to establish a link with any @xmath280 , as @xmath282 and the by establishing @xmath283 the sole change is the reduction of @xmath284 from @xmath265 to @xmath195 , @xmath285    eq . [ eq : no single hop ] also shows that if @xmath286 , it will not form a link with @xmath287 , while if @xmath288 it may not remove the link @xmath289 as otherwise @xmath2 is disconnected .
@xmath290 : first , assume that @xmath210 is a newly arrived player , hence it is disconnected . obviously , in its concern , a link to the star s center , player @xmath95 , is preferred over a link to any other type - b player .
similarly , a link to a player @xmath190 is preferred over a link to any other type - a player ( or if @xmath291 and @xmath292 , equivalent to a link to any other type - a player ) .
therefore , @xmath210 first link choice would be either @xmath293 or @xmath276 .
in other words , @xmath249 or @xmath294 . if @xmath249 , than no @xmath80 will agree to establish a link with @xmath210 , as it only reduces its distance from @xmath210 by one hop , and does nt alter @xmath114 for any other @xmath95
similarly , if @xmath294 than @xmath295    and the link would not be formed .
likewise , no link between @xmath287 and @xmath296 may be formed , as @xmath297    \3 .
@xmath298 , the star s center : @xmath210 may not remove any edge connected to a type - b player and render the graph disconnected . on the other hand ,
the previous discussion shows it will not establish additional links to nodes in @xmath201 .
note that the reliability requirements of players in @xmath299 are invalidated .
therefore , the cost of every player @xmath300 is at least @xmath301 , and we have @xmath302 .
hence , at any given turn , as soon as either @xmath303 and @xmath282 , the social cost is unbounded .    if @xmath304 a link between player @xmath80 and player @xmath228 will be formed .
however , as soon as player @xmath2 becomes the active player , it is beneficial for it to remove the link @xmath283 and establish a link to the star center @xmath94 instead .
therefore , after player @xmath2 s turn , the cost of player @xmath210 is again @xmath305 . in a similar fashion ,
if @xmath306 than player @xmath280 and player @xmath307 may establish the link @xmath4 .
this does not affect any other player and while it may reduce their costs , it does not provide them with two disjoint paths to the type - a clique , as they both must traverse player @xmath190 in order to access it . therefore , their costs is still @xmath305 .
although , at first sight , it might seem that this result is due to the greedy and myopic choice of edges , it is possible to show that there are cases in which this result holds even when players may pick their links strategically rather than in a greedy manner .
for example , if @xmath268 and the number of minor players is odd , than a similar analysis shows that a player in @xmath308 will establish a link to a single player in @xmath201 . however , as the number of minor players is odd , there will always be an unmatched player in either @xmath201 or @xmath269 and its cost will be @xmath305 .      recall that under the presence of monetary transfers , players @xmath2 and @xmath3 will agree to establish an edge if @xmath309 .
nevertheless , it may be that during the active player turn there are a few links that satisfy this condition , and the player _ _ must prioritize them .
each player s decision is myopic , and is based solely on the current state of the network .
hence , the order of establishing links is potentially important .
needless to say , a player s preference order will depend on the link prices .
while there are several alternatives , we adopt the following preference order @xcite :    denote the active player as player @xmath2 .
each link @xmath4 carries different utility in player @xmath310 respect .
it is reasonable to assume that a link with a lower connection value will be priced lower , so that the link with the least connection utility will be marked with the lowest price .
in fact , one may assume its price will be as much as the implied cost of the other party of this link .
we will denote this price as @xmath311 .
every other player @xmath95 will use this value and demand an additional payment from player @xmath2 for the link @xmath94 , as it is more beneficial for player @xmath2 . formally :    `` strategic '' pricing mechanism : set @xmath312 as the node that maximizes @xmath313 .
set @xmath314 .
finally , set @xmath315 the price that player @xmath3 requires in order to establish _
@xmath4 _ is _
_ @xmath316 .    under this pricing mechanism
, there could be many links that carry the same utility .
some of these links have a better connection value , but they come at a higher price .
since all the links carry the same utility , we need to decide on some preference mechanism for player @xmath2 .
the simplest one is the `` cheap '' choice , in which , if there are a few equivalent links , the player will choose the cheapest one .
this can be a reasonable choice , as new players can not spend too much resources , and therefore they will choose the `` cheapest '' option that belongs to the set of links with maximal utility .
preference order : player @xmath2 will establish links with player @xmath3 if player @xmath3 minimizes @xmath317 and @xmath318 .
if there are several players that minimize @xmath319 , then player @xmath2 will establish a link with a player that minimizes @xmath56 .
if there are several players that satisfy the previous condition , then one out of them is chosen randomly .
we are now at a position to identify an additional network motif , namely , the `` entangled cycles '' .
this network motif is composed of a line ( i.e. , interconnected sequence ) of minor players nodes , with some cross - links between the nodes along this line , breaking the hierarchy ( fig .
[ fig : the - entangled - loops ] ) .
the `` entangled cycle '' of length three is the `` feedback loop '' motif , which was previously found to exist in a higher frequency than expected in the internet graph @xcite
.    the `` entangled cycles '' motif .
a ) six minor player are connected in an `` entangled cycles '' subgraph .
the first two nodes have direct connection to some major player , and access the rest of the network by the major player s additional links , represented by the dotted line .
b ) if at some point , a link between a player in this subgraph and some external player is formed ( in this example , a major player ) , some links may be removed without violating the reliability requirement and without increasing the distance cost appreciably .
the removed links marked by a red x. ]    when a new minor player arrives , it will choose the two cheapest links and will connect to the corresponding players . clearly , its costs due to the distance from the rest of the network will be the highest .
as such , when the next player arrives , it will offer the lowest link price .
the new arrival will link to it and to one of its provider .
the process will repeat , until , at some point , an existing player will decide that this growing branch is too far from it , and will connect to one of the nodes along this `` entangled cycles '' . at this point , this subgraph will be over - saturated with links as players may utilize this link to access the internet core .
hence , some links will be removed ( see , for example fig .
[ fig : the - entangled - loops](b ) ) .
the set of the links that will be removed depends heavily on the playing order and the temporary network structure .
nevertheless , some cross - links may remain in order to satisfy reliability constrains .
this explains the following result .
[ thm : entangled cycles motif]assume the number of major players is at least 10 .
denote the distance cost of player @xmath320 @xmath20 , as @xmath321 , namely @xmath322 assume that a subset @xmath323 of minor player first join the game and play consecutively and that the two players with the maximal distance cost are adjacent .
then :    \a ) these players will form an `` entangled cycles '' structure of length @xmath165 , as depicted in fig .
[ fig : the - entangled - loops ] , and @xmath324    \b ) the entangled cycles structure is semi - stable , in the following sense : if , at some later turn , there exist players @xmath325 , @xmath326 such that the link @xmath4 is formed ( fig .
[ fig : the - entangled - loops](b ) ) , then some links in the `` entangled cycles '' structure may be removed in subsequent turns .
\a ) assume that at time @xmath193 a subset of @xmath327 minor players first join the game .
denote the set of players that are currently connected to the network by @xmath178 .
we denote by @xmath328 ( @xmath329 the number of type a players ( correspondingly , type - b player ) at that moment .
let us denote the players with the highest distance cost term as @xmath127 and @xmath330 , namely , @xmath331    where for simplicity we assumed that @xmath332 are minor player ( type - b players ) . according to the `` strategic '' pricing mechanism
a new player will establish links with these players , as they will offer the cheapest links .
note that by connecting to these players , its survivability requirements are satisfied , as each of these players maintain two disjoint path to every major player ( if the reliability requirements are asymmetric ) or to all other players ( in case of symmetric reliability requirements ) .
we are now going to prove by induction that player @xmath333 will first connect to players @xmath334 and @xmath335 .
we shall prove by this by proving that the distance costs of @xmath334 and @xmath335 are maximal .
first , note that for every player @xmath336 , we have @xmath337 and @xmath338 , since the path from @xmath3 to every player in @xmath178 pass through @xmath339 or @xmath340 , and @xmath341 .
therefore , in order to show that players @xmath334 and @xmath335 have the highest distance cost , it is sufficient to show that @xmath342 for every @xmath343 .
for every player @xmath344 we have @xmath345 since the path that connects player @xmath334 to the any player @xmath346 crosses either player @xmath127 or @xmath347 , which are adjacent .
therefore , the distance cost of player @xmath334 due to its distance from every player @xmath346 , denoted by @xmath348 is at least grater than the corresponding distance cost of player @xmath127 , @xmath349 by at least @xmath350 .
note that @xmath351 for every @xmath343 according to the definition of @xmath127
. however , player @xmath339 may be closer to players @xmath352 than player @xmath353 .
denote the maximal distance between any two players by @xmath274 we have , @xmath354    where @xmath210 is the maximal distance between two players . in proposition
[ prop : max distance ] it was shown that @xmath355    hence , @xmath354    as @xmath356 this expression is positive .
hence , links will be established as stated .
this shows that at the time player @xmath333 joins the game , the distance cost of player @xmath334 is maximal .
a similar calculation shows that at this turn , the distance cost @xmath357 is maximal in the set @xmath358 .
we have thus far shown that the first two links of a new player @xmath333 are to players @xmath334 and @xmath335 . nevertheless , as the `` entangled cycles '' motif grows , the incentive of other players to connect to players in it increases .
at some point , player @xmath3 may be able to form links with players not in @xmath323 , or an active player @xmath359 may decide to connect to some player in @xmath323 ( or vice versa for @xmath360 ) . in either of these cases , players in the `` entangled cycles '' motif may have three disjoint paths to other players , and may therefore remove a link , should they deemed to do so . in this case , the `` entangled cycles '' motif will be diluted .
this theorem shows that reliability is a major factor in breaking up tree hierarchy in the internet .
in addition , it also hints that the hierarchical structure does not break frequently in the top levels of the internet , but rather mostly in the intermediate and lower tiers .
note that according to theorem [ thm : entangled cycles motif](b ) , in large networks the length of the `` entangled motifs '' is short .
therefore , we do not expect to see excessively long structures , but rather small ones , having just a few ass .
in this section we compare our theoretical predictions with the real - world inter - as topology graph @xcite .
we classified ass to major players and minor players according the popular caida ranking @xcite .
for the sake of comparison with previous work @xcite , we classified the major players as the top 100 ass according to this ranking .    the mean length of the shortest cycle connecting a major player and a minor player as function of time , from january 2006 to october 2008 .
the length decrease as time passes and the network grows , in agreement with our model . ]    in section [ sec : monetary - transfers ] , we showed that , by allowing monetary transfers , the maximal cycle length connecting a major player to a minor player depends inversely on the number of major players .
as the number of ass increases in time , it is reasonable that the number of major player grows as well .
hence , we expect that the length of the shortest cycle connecting a major player to a minor player will decrease in time .
[ fig : the - mean cycle - length ] shows the mean cycle length connecting one of the secondary leading 2000 ass , ranked 101 - 2100 in caida ranking , and one of the top 100 nodes . the steady decline of the cycle s length in time
is predicted by our model .    the ratio of the mean number of disjoint paths connecting a minor player to the core to the mean degree of a minor player .
this ratio is above @xmath361 , and increases in time , showing that additional links are likely to part of disjoint paths to the core .
this ratio is presented as a function of time from january 2006 to october 2008 . ]
our analysis showed that in most of the generated topologies , the minor players are organized in small subgraphs that have direct connection to the internet core , namely the major players clique , or the tier-1 subgraph , in agreement with @xcite . in order to maintain a reliable connection , in each subgraph
there must be at least two links that connect minor players to the core .
indeed , we have found out that the ratio between the mean number of disjoint paths from a minor player to the core and the mean degree of minor players is more than @xmath361 , and it increases in time ( fig .
[ fig : disjoint path ratio ] ) .
that is , almost every outgoing link of a minor player is used to provide it with an additional , disjoint path to the core . in other words ,
a player is more likely to establish an additional link , hence increase its degree , if it supplies it with a new path to the core that does not intersect its current paths .        in section [ sec : dynamic - analysis ] we predicted the ubiquity of two network motifs , the `` double star '' motif ( fig .
[ fig : generalized star 2 ] ) and the `` entangled cycles '' motif ( fig .
[ fig : the - entangled - loops ] ) .
we define the occurrence of a `` double star '' motif as the existence of a a connected pair of nodes , each with degree greater than @xmath184 , designated as the centers , such that at least @xmath184 neighbors of one center are also neighbors of the other center .
we generated random networks according to the configuration model ( cm ) , in which each node is given a number of stubs according to its degree , and stubs are connected uniformly .
then , we evaluated the mean number of occurrences of this motif in a random cm network with the same number of nodes and the same degree distribution as the real inter - as topology . for @xmath362
, we have found @xmath363 occurrences in the real - world inter - as topology , whereas the mean number of occurrences in the random cm network was only * @xmath364 * instances ( the @xmath365 indicates standard deviation ) .
namely , there are more than four times displays of this subgraph in the internet than in a random network with the same degree distribution .
chebyshev s inequality provides a bound on the _ p - value , @xmath366 .
_ this low value indicates that it is highly unlikely that a random cm network explains the frequent appearance of this network motif .
we have tested the prevalence of this motif with other values of @xmath184 and the number of occurrences is consistently a few times more than expected in a random cm network .
our analysis suggests that reliability considerations is one of the factors leading to the increased number of incidents .
the unexpected prevalence of the `` feedback loop '' , which is a special case of the `` entangled cycles '' motif , was first reported in @xcite .
the `` feedback loop '' motif coincides with the entangled cycles motif of length three , and in order to further assess our results we tested for the occurrence frequency of the `` entangled cycles '' motif of length four . we compared the number of occurrences of this motif in the real - world internet graph to the expected number of occurrences in a random configuration model network .
while the number of instances of this motif in the internet graph was @xmath367 , the expected number of occurrences in the random network was only @xmath368 .
as before , the abundance of this network motif , an order of magnitude greater than expected ( _ @xmath369 _ , a relaxed bound based on chebyshev s inequality ) provides a positive indication to the implications of survivability requirements .    in summary ,
we have provided both static and dynamic empirical evidence that conform with our predictions , suggesting the importance of reliability considerations on the structure and dynamics of the inter - as topology .
while many studies have tried to model the internet structure , the list of works the explicitly address reliability considerations is much shorter .
furthermore , most of the theoretical models of the internet structure and dynamics assume homogenous agents , while the internet is inherently heterogeneous , composed of a wide variety of entities with different business models . in this work
, we found that constructing a model that includes these two factors , namely reliability and heterogeneity , may provide important insights on the internet structure and dynamics .
we first rigorously formulated a model of a network formation game in this context .
our model is flexible , and may be used in a wide variety of settings .
it allows for many variations and schemes , for example situations in which failures are frequent or rare , or to account for varying centrality of different types of players .
the homogeneity of the model also allows us to describe scenarios in which a fallback route is required only to a subset of players .
indeed , a reasonable as policy is to require a backup routing path only to the internet backbone , rather than establishing fault - tolerant routing pathways to every particular autonomous system .
we established the _ price of reliability , _ which measures the excess social cost that is required in order to maintain network survivability in an optimal stable equilibrium .
surprisingly , we showed that it can be smaller than one , that is , that the additional survivability constraints _ add _ to the social utility .
we have also showed that reliability requirements have disparate effects on different parts of the network .
while it may support dilution in dense areas , it facilitates edges formation in sparse areas , and in particular it supports the formation of edges connecting minor players and major players .    in our dynamic analysis
we have found the repetitive appearance of small sub - graphs , or network motifs , namely the `` entangled cycles '' motif and the `` double star '' motif .
indeed , the number of appearance of these motifs in the real inter - as topology surpassed the expected number by a few folds , indicating that additional factors support their formation , and as our analysis shows , survivability is one of them . we have also predicted that the length of the minimal cycle connecting a major player to a minor player should decrease in time .
this prediction , too , was verified by a dynamic data analysis .    finally ,
while our analysis focuses on the inter - as topology , it may be applied to other networks as well , that are composed of heterogeneous , rational agents that are required to maintain some reliability aspects .
primary examples are trade networks and mvno operators in the cellular market .    in this work
we have shown that a game theoretic analysis of network formation , which encompasses heterogeneous agents and explicitly addresses survivability concerns , holds promising results .
nevertheless , there are many open questions , such as the following .
how does the emerging network handle more than a single failure ? which incentive mechanism will promote increased reliability of the future internet ? what can a comparative analysis of experimental results on different networks tell us about the players strategies in each network ?
these , and many more , indicate that there is yet a lot to uncover in this intersection between network formation , heterogeneity and reliability .