EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 344 (2025) EPJ Web Conf., 344 (2025) 01054 References
Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 344, 2025
AI-Integrated Physics, Technology, and Engineering Conference (AIPTEC 2025)
Article Number 01054
Number of page(s) 9
Section AI-Integrated Physics, Technology, and Engineering
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202534401054
Published online 22 December 2025
  1. D. F. Spulber, The economics of markets and platforms. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 28, 1, 159–172 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12290 [Google Scholar]
  2. C. Y. Baldwin, C. J. Woodard, The architecture of platforms: A unified view. — (2009). https://doi.org/10.4337/9781849803311.00008 [Google Scholar]
  3. M. Rysman, The Economics of Two-Sided Markets. J. Econ. Perspect. 23, 3, 125–143 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.23.3.125 [Google Scholar]
  4. M. Cusumano, A. Gawer, Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 31, 3, 417–433 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12105 [Google Scholar]
  5. M. L. Katz, C. Shapiro, Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility. Am. Econ. Rev. 75, 3, 424–440 (1985). [Google Scholar]
  6. D. Trabucchi, T. Buganza, The power of two-sided platforms to disseminate resistant innovations. Manag. Decis. 59, 13, 1–14 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-06-2019-0727 [Google Scholar]
  7. W. H. Page, J. E. Lopatka, Network Externalities. Encycl. Law Econ. 952–980 (1999). [Google Scholar]
  8. V. Landsman, S. Stremersch, Multihoming in two- sided markets: An empirical inquiry in the video game console industry. J. Mark. 75, 6, 39–54 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.75.6.39 [Google Scholar]
  9. J. Crémer, P. Rey, J. Tirole, Connectivity in The Commercial Internet. J. Industrial Econ. 48, 4, 433–472 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6451.00132 [Google Scholar]
  10. T. Doganoglu, J. Wright, Multihoming and compatibility. Int. J. Ind. Organ. 24, 1, 45–67 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2005.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  11. H. Liu, X. Li, S. Wang, A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of platform research. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 169, 120827 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120827 [Google Scholar]
  12. J. M. Sanchez-Cartas, G. León, Multisided Platforms and Markets. J. Econ. Surv. 35, 2, 452–487 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12409 [Google Scholar]
  13. F. N. Qureshi, A. Pundziene, R. Adams, Appraising the Transformation and Future of Digital Multisided Platforms. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. PP, 1–15 (2023). [Google Scholar]
  14. J. Rietveld, M. A. Schilling, Platform Competition. J. Manage. 47, 6, 1528–1563 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320969791 [Google Scholar]
  15. G. Vlašić, F. Živković, Implications of Multi- Homing for Multi-Sided Platforms. Global Business Conference Proceedings. 224–237 (2022). [Google Scholar]
  16. B. Fahimnia, J. Sarkis, H. Davarzani, Green supply chain management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 162, 101–114 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  17. R. Hashem E, N. Z. Md Salleh, M. Abdullah, A. Ali, F. Faisal, R. M. Nor, Research trends and developments in brand attitude. Heliyon. 9, 1, e12765 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12765 [Google Scholar]
  18. J. Baas, M. Schotten, A. Plume, G. Côté, R. Karimi, Scopus as a curated bibliometric data source. Quant. Sci. Stud. 1, 1, 377–386 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00019 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hagiu, D. Spulber, First-party content and coordination in two-sided markets. Manage. Sci. 4, 1, 933–949 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1120.1577 [Google Scholar]
  20. Y. Bakos, H. Halaburda, Platform competition with multihoming on both sides. Manage. Sci. 66, 12, 5599–5607 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3636 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. M. Armstrong, J. Wright, Two-sided markets, competitive bottlenecks and exclusive contracts. Econ. Theory. 32, 2, 353–380 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-006-0114-6 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hagiu, Pricing and commitment by two-sided platforms. RAND J. Econ. 37, 3, 720–737 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00039.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Hagiu, Two-sided platforms: Product variety and pricing structures. J. Econ. Manag. Strateg. 18, 4, 1011–1043 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9134.2009.00236.x [Google Scholar]
  24. D. Raychaudhuri, N. B. Mandayam, Frontiers of wireless and mobile communications. Proc. IEEE. 100, 4, 824–840 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2011.2182095 [Google Scholar]
  25. Cennamo, H. Ozalp, T. Kretschmer, Platform Architecture and Quality Trade-offs of Multihoming Complements. Inf. Syst. Res. 29, 2, 461–478 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0779 [Google Scholar]
  26. J. P. Choi, Tying in Two-Sided Markets with Multi- Homing. J. Ind. Econ. 58, 3, 607–626 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6451.2010.00426.x [Google Scholar]
  27. L. Chen, J. Yi, S. Li, T. W. Tong, Platform Governance Design in Platform Ecosystems: Implications for Complementors’ Multihoming Decision. J. Manage. 48, 3, 630–656 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320988337 [Google Scholar]
  28. Bernstein, G. A. DeCroix, N. B. Keskin, Competition between two-sided platforms under demand and supply congestion effects. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 23, 5, 1043–1061 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0866 [Google Scholar]
  29. R. Sui, X. Zhang, B. Dan, H. Zhang, Y. Liu, Bilateral value-added service investment in platform competition with cross-side network effects under multihoming. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 304, 3, 952–963 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.04.041 [Google Scholar]
  30. P. Belleflamme, M. Peitz, Platform competition: Who benefits from multihoming? Int. J. Ind. Organ. 64, , 1–26 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2018.03.014 [Google Scholar]
  31. H. Wu, Y. Y. Chiu, Pricing and content development for online media platforms regarding consumer homing choices. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 305, 1, 312–328 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.05.030 [Google Scholar]
  32. M. Adler, R. K. Sitaraman, H. Venkataramani, Algorithms for optimizing the bandwidth cost of content delivery. Comput. Networks. 55, 18, 4007–4020 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2011.07.015 [Google Scholar]
  33. T. Hau, D. Burghardt, W. Brenner, Multihoming, content delivery networks, and the market for Internet connectivity. Telecomm. Policy. 35, 6, 532–542 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2011.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  34. S. J. Koh, S. W. Kim, mSCTP for vertical handover between heterogeneous networks. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 3597, 28–36 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11527725_4 [Google Scholar]
  35. Kloeck, H. Jaekel, F. K. Jondral, Dynamic and local combined pricing, allocation and billing system with cognitive radios. 1st IEEE DySPAN 2005. (2005), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1109/DYSPAN.2005.1542619 [Google Scholar]
  36. S. Mukherjee, S. Sriram, T. Vu, D. Raychaudhuri, EIR: Edge-aware inter-domain routing protocol for the future mobile internet. Comput. Networks. 127, , 13–30 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2017.07.013 [Google Scholar]
  37. S. Hyrynsalmi, A. Suominen, M. Mäntymäki, The influence of developer multi-homing on competition between software ecosystems. J. Syst. Softw. 111, , 119–127 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.08.053 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kang, A. Aaltonen, O. Henfridsson, The impact of platform entry strategies on the quality of complements in multihoming. ICIS 2019. (2019). [Google Scholar]
  39. S. Hyrynsalmi, M. Mäntymäki, Baur, Multi- homing and Software Firm Performance. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (2017), 442–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68557-1_39 [Google Scholar]
  40. K. Rong, F. Xiao, X. Zhang, J. Wang, Platform strategies and user stickiness in the online video industry. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change. 143, , 249–259 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.01.023 [Google Scholar]
  41. J. Xie, W. Zhu, L. Wei, L. Liang, Platform competition with partial multi-homing. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 233, 108016 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.108016 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  42. S. Athey, E. Calvano, J. S. Gans, The Impact of Consumer Multi-homing on Advertising Markets and Media Competition. Manage. Sci. 64, 4, 1574–1590 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2675 [Google Scholar]
  43. P. Anderson, Ø. Foros, H. J. Kind, Competition for Advertisers and for Viewers in Media Markets. Econ. J. 128, 608, 34–54 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12428 [Google Scholar]
  44. K. F. Park, R. Seamans, F. Zhu, Homing and platform responses to entry: Historical evidence from the U.S. newspaper industry. Strateg. Manag. J. 42, 4, 684–709 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3241 [Google Scholar]
  45. K. Zhang, M. Sarvary, K. Zhang, Differentiation with User-Generated Content. Manage. Sci. 61, 4, 898–914 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1907 [Google Scholar]
  46. K. Rong, F. Xiao, Y. Wang, Redundancy in the sharing economy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 151, 104455 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104455 [Google Scholar]
  47. K. Zhang, Y. (Marco) Nie, Inter-platform competition in a regulated ride-hail market with pooling. Transp. Res. Part E. 151, 102327 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2021.102327 [Google Scholar]
  48. Herawatie, N. Siswanto, E. Widodo, Motorcycle Taxi in Shared Mobility and Informal Transportation. J. Inf. Syst. Eng. Bus. Intell. 10, 2, 250–269 (2024). https://doi.org/10.20473/jisebi.10.2.250-269 [Google Scholar]
  49. J. C. Rochet, J. Tirole, Platform competition in two- sided markets. Compet. Policy Int. 10, 2, 180–218 (2003). [Google Scholar]
  50. J. C. Rochet, J. Tirole, Two-sided markets: A progress report. RAND J. Econ. 37, 3, 645–667 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2006.tb00036.x [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.