IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2202.05947.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Artificial Intelligence and Auction Design

Author

Listed:
  • Martino Banchio
  • Andrzej Skrzypacz

Abstract

Motivated by online advertising auctions, we study auction design in repeated auctions played by simple Artificial Intelligence algorithms (Q-learning). We find that first-price auctions with no additional feedback lead to tacit-collusive outcomes (bids lower than values), while second-price auctions do not. We show that the difference is driven by the incentive in first-price auctions to outbid opponents by just one bid increment. This facilitates re-coordination on low bids after a phase of experimentation. We also show that providing information about lowest bid to win, as introduced by Google at the time of switch to first-price auctions, increases competitiveness of auctions.

Suggested Citation

  • Martino Banchio & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Auction Design," Papers 2202.05947, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2202.05947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.05947
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
    2. McAfee, R Preston & McMillan, John, 1992. "Bidding Rings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(3), pages 579-599, June.
      • McAfee, R. Preston & McMillan, John., 1990. "Bidding Rings," Working Papers 726, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    3. Erev, Ido & Roth, Alvin E, 1998. "Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 848-881, September.
    4. Zach Y. Brown & Alexander MacKay, 2023. "Competition in Pricing Algorithms," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 109-156, May.
    5. Athey, Susan & Bagwell, Kyle, 2001. "Optimal Collusion with Private Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(3), pages 428-465, Autumn.
    6. Skrzypacz, Andrzej & Hopenhayn, Hugo, 2004. "Tacit collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-169, January.
    7. Emilio Calvano & Giacomo Calzolari & Vincenzo Denicolò & Sergio Pastorello, 2020. "Artificial Intelligence, Algorithmic Pricing, and Collusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3267-3297, October.
    8. Martino Banchio & Giacomo Mantegazza, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Spontaneous Collusion," Papers 2202.05946, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    9. Erev, Ido & Bereby-Meyer, Yoella & Roth, Alvin E., 1999. "The effect of adding a constant to all payoffs: experimental investigation, and implications for reinforcement learning models," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 111-128, May.
    10. John Asker & Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence, Algorithm Design, and Pricing," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 112, pages 452-456, May.
    11. Robert C. Marshall & Leslie M. Marx, 2009. "The Vulnerability of Auctions to Bidder Collusion," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 883-910.
    12. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "The Theory of Learning in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061945, December.
    13. Piotr Dworczak, 2020. "Mechanism Design With Aftermarkets: Cutoff Mechanisms," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2629-2661, November.
    14. Aoyagi, Masaki, 2003. "Bid rotation and collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 79-105, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peyman Khezr & Vijay Mohan & Lionel Page, 2024. "Strategic Bidding in Knapsack Auctions," Papers 2403.07928, arXiv.org.
    2. Wuming Fu & Qian Qi, 2023. "Artificial Intelligence and Dual Contract," Papers 2303.12350, arXiv.org.
    3. Inkoo Cho & Noah Williams, 2024. "Collusive Outcomes Without Collusion," Papers 2403.07177, arXiv.org.
    4. Ivan Conjeaud, 2023. "Spontaneous Coupling of Q-Learning Algorithms in Equilibrium," Papers 2312.02644, arXiv.org.
    5. Olivier Compte, 2023. "Q-learning with biased policy rules," Papers 2304.12647, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    6. Rohit Lamba & Sergey Zhuk, 2022. "Pricing with algorithms," Papers 2205.04661, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    7. Martino Banchio & Giacomo Mantegazza, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Spontaneous Collusion," Papers 2202.05946, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    8. Daniele Condorelli & Massimiliano Furlan, 2023. "Cheap Talking Algorithms," Papers 2310.07867, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martino Banchio & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Auction Design," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Artificial Intelligence, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Martino Banchio & Giacomo Mantegazza, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Spontaneous Collusion," Papers 2202.05946, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    3. Ido Erev & Eyal Ert & Alvin E. Roth, 2010. "A Choice Prediction Competition for Market Entry Games: An Introduction," Games, MDPI, vol. 1(2), pages 1-20, May.
    4. Faison P. Gibson, 2002. "Is It Better to Forget? Stimulus-Response, Prediction, and the Weight of Past Experience in a Fast-Paced Bargaining Task," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 31-47, May.
    5. Agranov, Marina & Yariv, Leeat, 2018. "Collusion through communication in auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 93-108.
    6. Nicolas Gruyer, 2005. "Using lotteries in auctions when buyers collude," Economics Working Papers 02, LEEA (air transport economics laboratory), ENAC (french national civil aviation school).
    7. Che,Y.-K. & Kim,J., 2004. "Collusion-proof implementation of optimal mechanisms," Working papers 4, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    8. Skrzypacz, Andrzej & Hopenhayn, Hugo, 2004. "Tacit collusion in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 153-169, January.
    9. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.
    10. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2013. "Endogenous bid rotation in repeated auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(4), pages 1714-1725.
    11. Lee, Gea M., 2010. "Optimal collusion with internal contracting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 646-669, March.
    12. Susan Athey & Kyle Bagwell, 2008. "Collusion With Persistent Cost Shocks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 493-540, May.
    13. Che, Yeon-Koo & Condorelli, Daniele & Kim, Jinwoo, 2018. "Weak cartels and collusion-proof auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 398-435.
    14. Kim-Sau Chung, 2002. "Optimal Repeated Auction with Tacit Collusion (joint with Atila Abdulkadiroglu)," Theory workshop papers 357966000000000093, UCLA Department of Economics.
    15. Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2015. "Bribing in second-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 191-205.
    16. Sylvain Chassang & Juan Ortner, 2019. "Collusion in Auctions with Constrained Bids: Theory and Evidence from Public Procurement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(5), pages 2269-2300.
    17. Andreas Flache & Michael W. Macy, 2002. "Stochastic Collusion and the Power Law of Learning," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(5), pages 629-653, October.
    18. Ido Erev & Alvin Roth & Robert Slonim & Greg Barron, 2007. "Learning and equilibrium as useful approximations: Accuracy of prediction on randomly selected constant sum games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(1), pages 29-51, October.
    19. W Chen & Y Chen & D Levine, 2015. "A Unifying Learning Framework for Building Artificial Game-Playing Agents," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000001002, David K. Levine.
    20. Palacio, Sebastián M., 2020. "Predicting collusive patterns in a liberalized electricity market with mandatory auctions of forward contracts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2202.05947. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.