  Despite the increasing popularity and successful examples of crowdsourcing,
it is stripped of aureole when collective efforts are derailed or severely
hindered by elaborate sabotage. A service exchange dilemma arises when
non-cooperation among self-interested users, and zero social welfare is
obtained at myopic equilibrium. Traditional rating protocols are not effective
to overcome the inefficiency of the socially undesirable equilibrium due to
specific features of crowdsourcing: a large number of anonymous users having
asymmetric service requirements, different service capabilities, and
dynamically joining/leaving a crowdsourcing platform with imperfect monitoring.
In this paper, we develop the first game-theoretic design of the two-sided
rating protocol to stimulate cooperation among self-interested users, which
consists of a recommended strategy and a rating update rule. The recommended
strategy recommends a desirable behavior from three predefined plans according
to intrinsic parameters, while the rating update rule involves the update of
ratings of both users, and uses differential punishments that punish users with
different ratings differently. By quantifying necessary and sufficient
conditions for a sustainable social norm, we formulate the problem of designing
an optimal two-sided rating protocol that maximizes the social welfare among
all sustainable protocols, provide design guidelines for optimal two-sided
rating protocols and a low-complexity algorithm to select optimal design
parameters in an alternate manner. Finally, evaluation results show the
validity and effectiveness of our protocol designed for service exchange
dilemma in crowdsourcing.
