Computational Cost of bilinear maps What is the exact computational complexity in absolute operation numbers (multiplications, exponentiations, etc) of a bilinear map evaluation both for symmetric and asymetric groups. And how this is comparable with exponentiation?
This question can't be answered exactly, because it depends on a lot of the actual details of the realization. But as a rule of thumb: They cost a lot. In fact they cost so much, that in any protocol they are the sole determinator of the computation time and you can neglect the other operations.

First, keep in mind that usually bilinear maps are realized with elliptic curves. There is no straight forward bilinear maps in $\mathbb{F}_p$, which can be used for cryptographic tasks. Currently the only known constructions for (cryptographically useful) pairings are:


Weil pairing
Tate pairing


So first we need to consider the elliptic group operation, where the number of operations (addition, multiplication, etc.) can vary. Looking at the definition of the Weil pairings, we soon get to the following conclusion:


There is an integer $n$, which is chosen at the setup, but its role isn't that clear to begin with.
There is a function $F$ (on values $P,Q$), which just has to fulfill some property, but isn't specified any further. But the definition of the divisor has a sum, where the number of addends are linear in $n$, so the compuational complexity of $F$ will depend somehow on the choice of $n$.
The function definition $w(P,Q):= F/G$ has the $n$-th roots of unity as its image. Thinking of the bilinear map, this is the target group. And for cryptographic purposes we need a group where the discrete logarithm is hard in the target group, so we can conclude that $n$ has to be large.


This already shows, that unless you specify exactly what kind of elliptic curve and which kind of Weil pairing (or Tate pairing) you have, you can't state an explicit number of operations. 

For further information I would suggest reading Pairings for beginners from Craig Costello, which also has plenty of examples with numbers.