IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2306.09437.html

Designing Auctions when Algorithms Learn to Bid

Author

Listed:
  • Pranjal Rawat

Abstract

Algorithms increasingly automate bidding in online auctions, raising concerns about tacit bid suppression and revenue shortfalls. Prior work identifies individual mechanisms behind algorithmic bid suppression, but it remains unclear which factors matter most and how they interact, and policy conclusions rest on algorithms unlike those deployed in practice. This paper develops a computational laboratory framework, based on factorial experimental designs and large-scale Monte Carlo simulation, that addresses bid suppression across multiple algorithm classes within a common methodology. Each simulation is treated as a black-box input-output observation; the framework varies inputs and ranks factors by association with outcomes, without explaining algorithms' internal mechanisms. Across six sub-experiments spanning Q-learning, contextual bandits, and budget-constrained pacing, the framework ranks the relative importance of auction format, competitive pressure, learning parameters, and budget constraints on seller revenue. The central finding is that structural market parameters dominate algorithmic design choices. In unconstrained settings, competitive pressure is the strongest predictor of revenue; under budget constraints, budget tightness takes over. The auction-format effect is context-dependent, favouring second-price under learning algorithms but reversing to favour first-price under budget-constrained pacing. Because the optimal format depends on the prevailing bidding technology, no single auction format is universally superior when bidders are algorithms, and applying format recommendations from one algorithm class to another leads to counterproductive design interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pranjal Rawat, 2023. "Designing Auctions when Algorithms Learn to Bid," Papers 2306.09437, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2306.09437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2306.09437
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael D. Noel, 2008. "Edgeworth Price Cycles and Focal Prices: Computational Dynamic Markov Equilibria," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(2), pages 345-377, June.
    2. Martino Banchio & Giacomo Mantegazza, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Spontaneous Collusion," Papers 2202.05946, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    3. Susan Athey & Guido Imbens, 2016. "The Econometrics of Randomized Experiments," Papers 1607.00698, arXiv.org.
    4. Stephanie Assad & Robert Clark & Daniel Ershov & Lei Xu, 2020. "Algorithmic Pricing and Competition: Empirical Evidence from the German Retail Gasoline Market," Working Paper 1438, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    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. Sriram Tolety, 2025. "Tacit Bidder-Side Collusion: Artificial Intelligence in Dynamic Auctions," Papers 2511.21802, arXiv.org.

    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. Timo Klein, 2021. "Autonomous algorithmic collusion: Q‐learning under sequential pricing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(3), pages 538-558, September.
    2. Gonzalo Ballestero, 2021. "Collusion and Artificial Intelligence: A computational experiment with sequential pricing algorithms under stochastic costs," Young Researchers Working Papers 1, Universidad de San Andres, Departamento de Economia, revised Oct 2022.
    3. Gonzalo Ballestero, 2022. "Collusion and Artificial Intelligence: A Computational Experiment with Sequential Pricing Algorithms under Stochastic Costs," Working Papers 118, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    4. Ludovico Crippa & Yonatan Gur & Bar Light, 2022. "Equilibria in Repeated Games under No-Regret with Dynamic Benchmarks," Papers 2212.03152, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    5. Montag, Felix & Mamrak, Robin & Sagimuldina, Alina & Schnitzer, Monika, 2023. "Imperfect price information, market power, and tax pass-through," Working Papers 337, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    6. Inkoo Cho & Noah Williams, 2024. "Collusive Outcomes Without Collusion," Papers 2403.07177, arXiv.org.
    7. Johnsen, Åshild A. & Kvaløy, Ola, 2021. "Conspiracy against the public - An experiment on collusion11“People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.” (Adam," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    8. Bantle, Melissa, 2024. "Screen for collusive behavior: A machine learning approach," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 01-2024, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    9. Øystein Foros & Mai Nguyen-Ones & Frode Steen, 2021. "The Effects of a Day off from Retail Price Competition: Evidence on Consumer Behavior and Firm Performance in Gasoline Retailing," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 49-87, January.
    10. Angela S. Bergantino & Claudia Capozza & Mauro Capurso, 2018. "Pricing strategies: who leads and who follows in the air and rail passenger markets in Italy," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(46), pages 4937-4953, October.
    11. Noel, Michael D., 2015. "Do Edgeworth price cycles lead to higher or lower prices?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 81-93.
    12. Abhijit Banerjee & Rukmini Banerji & James Berry & Esther Duflo & Harini Kannan & Shobhini Mukerji & Marc Shotland & Michael Walton, 2017. "From Proof of Concept to Scalable Policies: Challenges and Solutions, with an Application," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 73-102, Fall.
    13. Michael Noel, 2009. "Do retail gasoline prices respond asymmetrically to cost shocks? The influence of Edgeworth Cycles," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 582-595, September.
    14. de Roos, Nicolas, 2017. "Edgeworth cycles with partial price commitment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 122-125.
    15. Bingyan Han, 2021. "Algorithmic pricing with independent learners and relative experience replay," Papers 2102.09139, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    16. Marcel Wieting & Geza Sapi, 2021. "Algorithms in the Marketplace: An Empirical Analysis of Automated Pricing in E-Commerce," Working Papers 21-06, NET Institute.
    17. Sara Ellison & Christopher M. Snyder, 2014. "An Empirical Study of Pricing Strategies in an Online Market with High-Frequency Price Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 4655, CESifo.
    18. Sara Ellison & Christopher M. Snyder & Hongkai Zhang, 2016. "Costs of Managerial Attention and Activity as a Source of Sticky Prices: Structural Estimates from an Online Market," CESifo Working Paper Series 6285, CESifo.
    19. Werner, Tobias, 2021. "Algorithmic and human collusion," DICE Discussion Papers 372, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    20. Drolsbach, Chiara Patricia & Gail, Maximilian Maurice & Klotz, Phil-Adrian, 2023. "Pass-through of Temporary Fuel Tax Reductions: Evidence from Europe," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277655, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    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:2306.09437. 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.