i}^{e} < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he would still lose and his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. If instead he reports $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$. Two cases can occur. If he still loses his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. But if he wins, then he had to beat some valuation $\upsilon_{j}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$ and hence $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{j}^{e}$. Now as he wins his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^{e} = \mathcal{P}_{i}^{e} - \upsilon_i^e = \upsilon_j^e - 
\upsilon_i^e < 0$. So he would have got a negative utility. Hence no gain is achieved.\
Considering the case 1 and case 2 above, it can be concluded that any agent *i* can’t gain by mis-reporting his bid value. The proof is carried out by considering the *task executers*, similar argument can be given for the *task requesters*. This completes the proof.

\[l3\] STEM is weakly Budget balanced.

Fix the time slot $\tau_i$ and cluster $\mathsterling_{j}^i$. This corresponds to the case when the sum of all the monetary transfers of all the agents type profiles is less than or equal to *zero*. Now, the construction of our STEM is such that, any *task executer* and *task requester* is paired up only when $\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. It means that, for any *task executer*-*task requester* pair there exist some surplus. In the similar fashion, in a particular time slot $\tau_i$ and in a particular cluster considering all the agents, $\sum_{i}\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \sum_{i}\mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. Hence, the sum total of payments made to the *task executers* is at least as high as the sum total of the payments received by the *
i}^{e } < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he would still lose and his utility $ \hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. If instead he report $ \hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e } > \upsilon_{i}^e$. Two case can occur. If he still loses his utility program $ \hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. But if he wins, then he had to beat some evaluation $ \upsilon_{j}^{e } > \upsilon_{i}^e$ and therefore $ \hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e } > \upsilon_{j}^{e}$. Now as he wins his utility $ \hat{\varphi}_i^{e } = \mathcal{P}_{i}^{e } - \upsilon_i^e = \upsilon_j^e - 
 \upsilon_i^e < 0$. So he would have got a minus utility. Hence no profit is achieved.\ 
 regard the case 1 and case 2 above, it can be concluded that any agent * i * ca n’t gain by myocardial infarction - reporting his bid value. The proof is carry out by considering the * task executers *, similar argument can be pass for the * task requesters *. This completes the proof. 

 \[l3\ ] STEM is weakly Budget balanced. 

 Fix the meter slot $ \tau_i$ and cluster $ \mathsterling_{j}^i$. This corresponds to the case when the sum of all the monetary transfers of all the agents type profiles is less than or equal to * zero *. Now, the construction of our STEM is such that, any * task executer * and * task requester * is paired up only when $ \mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e } - \mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. It means that, for any * task executer*-*task requester * pair there exist some excess. In the alike fashion, in a finical meter slot $ \tau_i$ and in a particular cluster regard all the agents, $ \sum_{i}\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e } - \sum_{i}\mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. Hence, the sum total of requital made to the * task executers * is at least as high as the sum total of the payment received by the *
i}^{e} < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he would stilu lose and his otulity $\iat{\varpgi}_i^e = 0 = \xarphi_i^e$. If instead he reporvs $\hqt{\upsulon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$. Two zases can occur. Id he wtill loses his utljity $\mat{\vaxpii}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^g$. But if he fins, then he hdd tl beat some valuation $\upsilon_{j}^{e} > \upfilon_{i}^e$ ajd hence $\hat{\upfilom}_{y}^{e} > \hisllon_{j}^{e}$. Now as he wins his utilitg $\hat{\vagphi}_i^{e} = \mathcal{P}_{i}^{r} - \upsilon_i^e = \upsilon_j^e - 
\uosilln_i^e < 0$. So he would have got a negwrive utility. Hence no gain is achigved.\
Considering the case 1 and care 2 ayove, it can bw cltcluded thav any wgent *i* can’t gain by mis-repprting his bid vanue. The proof is carried out by considerind the *tasn zxecuters*, similar argymwnt cdn ba gixwn wor tie *fask rfquxsters*. This completes rhe proof.

\[l3\] STEM is eewjly Budget bamanced.

Siv the time slot $\tau_i$ and cluster $\mathsttrlinf_{j}^i$. This corresponds to the case when the sul of all ehe monetary transfers of all the agents type proxiles ks oefr tjan or equal to *zero*. Now, the construction of jhr SNEM is such that, cny *task executet* wnc *task requestgr* is pcjrsd up only when $\mahhcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_y^{e} - \kathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \gwq 0$. It means rhat, for any *task zxecuter*-*task reqoester* pair there exist some rurpmus. In the dimilar fzrhion, in a partizulsr time slot $\tau_i$ and in a pwrticular cluxter covsidgring ajl the agejts, $\smk_{i}\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mwthcap{P}_h^{e} - \sum_{i}\mahhcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. Heire, the sum tojal of paymentf madc to the *task evecuters* is at least cs higf as the slm total mf the paymqnts received hy the *
i}^{e} < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he would still lose utility = 0 \varphi_i^e$. If instead Two can occur. If still loses his $\hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. But he wins, then he had to beat some valuation $\upsilon_{j}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$ and $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{j}^{e}$. Now as he wins his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^{e} = \mathcal{P}_{i}^{e} - = - < So he would have got a negative utility. Hence no gain is achieved.\ Considering the case and case 2 above, it can be concluded any agent *i* can’t by mis-reporting his bid value. proof carried out considering *task similar argument can given for the *task requesters*. This completes the proof. \[l3\] STEM is weakly Budget balanced. Fix the slot $\tau_i$ $\mathsterling_{j}^i$. This to case the sum of monetary transfers of all the agents less than or equal to *zero*. Now, the of our is such that, any *task executer* *task requester* is paired up only when $\mathcal{S}_i \mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$. It means that, for any *task executer*-*task requester* exist some surplus. In similar fashion, in particular slot and a particular considering all the agents, $\sum_{i}\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \sum_{i}\mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r 0$. Hence, the sum total of payments made to the is least as high the sum total of payments by the *
i}^{e} < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he would still loSe and his utIlity $\Hat{\VarPhI}_i^e = 0 = \vArphI_i^e$. If instead he REporTs $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^E$. Two cAsES can OCcUr. If hE still lOSeS HIs uTiLiTy $\hAt{\VArPhi}_i^e = 0 = \VarPhi_i^e$. BuT if he wins, tHen He Had to beat somE VaLuation $\upsIloN_{j}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$ And Hence $\hAt{\UpsILon}_{i}^{e} > \UpsIlon_{j}^{E}$. Now as HE wins hIs utility $\HaT{\Varphi}_I^{E} = \mathcaL{p}_{I}^{e} - \UpsiLon_i^e = \upsilon_j^e - 
\upsILoN_I^e < 0$. So he would havE got a nEgATiVE UtiLitY. Hence no gaIn Is achIEved.\
ConSIdERINg tHE case 1 and case 2 aBove, it can be COncLuded tHaT anY Agent *i* Can’t gAiN By mIs-reporting His bId value. ThE proof IS carrieD Out by coNsiderIng The *Task EXeCuTerS*, sIMilAR aRguMEnt Can be givEn FoR the *tAsk rEQUESterS*. ThIs coMpletEs the proof.

\[l3\] STeM iS weaKLy BUdget BalanCed.

FIx The tiMe slot $\Tau_i$ aNd Cluster $\mathsterLing_{J}^i$. This corResPoNds To The caSE when tHe sUm oF all the MonetarY TraNsFERS oF all the agents type pRoFILeS is less tHan or eQUaL tO *Zero*. Now, tHe ConStruCTIon of Our SteM Is such thAt, any *tASk ExEcuter* aNd *Task reQuEstEr* iS pairED up oNly wheN $\mathcal{s}_i \cdoT \Mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \mathCAl{B}_i \cdot \mathcAL{P}_I^R \GeQ 0$. it meAns That, for any *tAsk eXEcutEr*-*taSK rEquESter* pAir thErE ExISt some surplus. In the sImIlar faShion, In a particular Time slot $\taU_I$ ANd in a parTicuLAr CLuster considerIng alL the agents, $\SUm_{i}\mathcAl{S}_i \cDot \mathcAl{P}_i^{e} - \sum_{i}\MAThcal{B}_i \cDot \MatHcaL{P}_i^R \GEq 0$. hence, the sum toTAL of pAyMents maDe tO the *tasK exEcuTerS* is At Least as hiGh as the sUm ToTaL oF thE paymENts receiVeD by ThE *
i}^{e} < \upsilon_{i}^{e}$ , he would  stil l l ose  a nd h is u tility $\hat{\ v arph i}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i ^e$.If inst e ad  he r eports$ \h a t {\u ps il on} _{ i }^ {e} >  \u psilon_ {i}^e$. Tw o c as es can occur .  I f he still  lo ses his util ity  $\hat {\ var p hi}_i ^e= 0 =  \varp h i_i^e$ . But ifhe wins,t hen heh a dto b eat some valuatio n  $ \ upsilon_{j}^{e } > \u ps i lo n _ {i} ^e$  and hence  $ \hat{ \ upsilon } _{ i } ^ {e} > \upsilon_{j }^{e}$. Now ashe win shis utilit y $\h at { \va rphi}_i^{e}  = \ mathcal{P }_{i}^ { e} - \u p silon_i ^e = \ ups ilo n_j^ e  -  \up si l on_ i ^e  <0 $.So he wo ul dhavegota n e gati veutil ity.Hence no gain  is  ach i eve d.\
C onsid erin gthe c ase 1and c as e 2 above, it c an b e conclud edth atan y age n t *i*can ’tgain by  mis-re p ort in g h is  bid value. The pr oo f is  carried  out b y  c on s ideringth e * task e xecut ers* ,  s imilar a rgumen t  c an  be giv en  for t he  *t ask  requ e ster s*. Th is compl etest he proof.

\[l 3 \] STEM is we a kl y Bu d getbal anced.

Fix  the time  slo t  $ \ta u _i$ a nd cl us t er $\mathsterling_{j}^ i$ . This  corr esponds to th e case whe n t he sum o f al l  t h e monetary tra nsfer s of all t h e agents  type  profile s is less t han or e qua l t o * zer o * .Now, the cons t r ucti on  of our  ST EM is s uch  th at,  an y*task exe cuter* a nd  * ta sk  re quest e r* is pa ir edup  on ly wh e n $\ma thcal {S}_ i\c d ot\mathca l {P } _ i^{e }-\mat hca l{ B}_i\cdo t  \m athcal{ P}_i^r \g eq0 $. I tme ans tha t, for any *t as k executer *- *ta sk req u e ster* pa ir there exist some sur p lus. In  th e sim ilar  fashion,  in  a par tic u lar ti me slo t $\t au _i$ a nd in a  p art ic ular clust e r  co nside ri ng a ll theagents, $\sum_{i}\ m ath cal{S}_i \cdo t \ math c a l{ P}_ i ^{ e } -  \ s um_ { i }\mathcal{B}_i\cdot \mat hc a l{ P}_i^r \ge q  0$ .Hence,the sum  tota l  of pay ments mad e to the*t aske x ecu ters* is a t leastas high a s  thes um  tota l o f thepa yme nts r eceive d  by  the*
i}^{e} <_\upsilon_{i}^{e}$, he_would still lose and_his utility_$\hat{\varphi}_i^e_= 0_=_\varphi_i^e$. If instead_he reports $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e}_> \upsilon_{i}^e$. Two cases_can occur. If_he_still loses his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^e = 0 = \varphi_i^e$. But if he wins, then_he_had to_beat_some_valuation $\upsilon_{j}^{e} > \upsilon_{i}^e$ and_hence $\hat{\upsilon}_{i}^{e} > \upsilon_{j}^{e}$. Now_as he_wins his utility $\hat{\varphi}_i^{e} = \mathcal{P}_{i}^{e} - \upsilon_i^e_=_\upsilon_j^e - 
\upsilon_i^e_< 0$. So he would have got a negative_utility. Hence no gain is achieved.\
Considering_the case 1_and_case_2 above, it can_be concluded that any agent *i*_can’t gain by mis-reporting his bid_value. The proof is carried out by_considering the *task executers*, similar argument_can be given for the_*task requesters*._This completes the proof.

\[l3\] STEM_is weakly Budget_balanced.

Fix the_time slot $\tau_i$_and cluster $\mathsterling_{j}^i$. This corresponds to_the case when_the sum of all the monetary_transfers_of all the_agents_type_profiles is_less than or_equal_to *zero*._Now,_the construction of our STEM is_such_that, any *task executer* and *task requester*_is paired up only_when_$\mathcal{S}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^{e} -_\mathcal{B}_i \cdot \mathcal{P}_i^r \geq 0$._It means that, for any *task_executer*-*task requester*_pair there_exist some surplus. In the similar fashion, in a particular time_slot $\tau_i$ and in a particular_cluster considering all the_agents, $\sum_{i}\mathcal{S}_i_\cdot_\mathcal{P}_i^{e} - \sum_{i}\mathcal{B}_i_\cdot_\mathcal{P}_i^r \geq_0$. Hence, the sum total of payments_made to_the *task executers* is at least_as high as the_sum_total of the payments received by_the *