IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2511.21802.html

Tacit Bidder-Side Collusion: Artificial Intelligence in Dynamic Auctions

Author

Listed:
  • Sriram Tolety

Abstract

We study whether large language models acting as autonomous bidders can tacitly collude by coordinating when to accept platform posted payouts in repeated Dutch auctions, without any communication. We present a minimal repeated auction model that yields a simple incentive compatibility condition and a closed form threshold for sustainable collusion for subgame-perfect Nash equilibria. In controlled simulations with multiple language models, we observe systematic supra-competitive prices in small auction settings and a return to competitive behavior as the number of bidders in the market increases, consistent with the theoretical model. We also find LLMs use various mechanisms to facilitate tacit coordination, such as focal point acceptance timing versus patient strategies that track the theoretical incentives. The results provide, to our knowledge, the first evidence of bidder side tacit collusion by LLMs and show that market structure levers can be more effective than capability limits for mitigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sriram Tolety, 2025. "Tacit Bidder-Side Collusion: Artificial Intelligence in Dynamic Auctions," Papers 2511.21802, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2511.21802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.21802
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Keith Chen & Judith A. Chevalier & Peter E. Rossi & Emily Oehlsen, 2019. "The Value of Flexible Work: Evidence from Uber Drivers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(6), pages 2735-2794.
    2. John Asker & Chaim Fershtman & Ariel Pakes, 2024. "The impact of artificial intelligence design on pricing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 276-304, March.
    3. Paul Klemperer, 1999. "Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-286, July.
    4. Martino Banchio & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2022. "Artificial Intelligence and Auction Design," NBER Chapters, in: Economics of Artificial Intelligence, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. James W. Friedman, 1973. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames: A Correction," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 40(3), pages 435-435.
    6. Shidi Deng & Maximilian Schiffer & Martin Bichler, 2024. "Algorithmic Collusion in Dynamic Pricing with Deep Reinforcement Learning," Papers 2406.02437, arXiv.org.
    7. Jean‐Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2006. "Two‐sided markets: a progress report," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 645-667, September.
    8. M. Keith Chen & Katherine Feinerman & Kareem Haggag, 2024. "Flexible Pay and Labor Supply: Evidence from Uber’s Instant Pay," NBER Working Papers 33177, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Klemperer, Paul, 1999. " Auction Theory: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 227-86, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gillian K. Hadfield & Andrew Koh, 2025. "An Economy of AI Agents," Papers 2509.01063, arXiv.org.
    2. Mezzetti, Claudio & Pekec, Aleksandar Sasa & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2008. "Sequential vs. single-round uniform-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 591-609, March.
    3. Stuart Kells, 2003. "Explaining The Breadth Of Expert Estimate Ranges In Auctions Of Rare Books," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 873, The University of Melbourne.
    4. Jacob K. Goeree & Theo Offerman, 2003. "Competitive Bidding in Auctions with Private and Common Values," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(489), pages 598-613, July.
    5. Amar Cheema & Dipankar Chakravarti & Atanu R. Sinha, 2012. "Bidding Behavior in Descending and Ascending Auctions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(5), pages 779-800, September.
    6. Adam, Marc T.P. & Krämer, Jan & Müller, Marius B., 2015. "Auction Fever! How Time Pressure and Social Competition Affect Bidders’ Arousal and Bids in Retail Auctions," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 468-485.
    7. Bobtcheff, Catherine & Alary, David & Haritchabalet, Carole, 2020. "Organizing insurance supply for new and undiversifiable risks," CEPR Discussion Papers 15234, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. David P. Baron, 2018. "Disruptive Entrepreneurship and Dual Purpose Strategies: The Case of Uber," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 439-462, June.
    9. Stella C. Dong & James R. Finlay, 2025. "Dynamic Reinsurance Treaty Bidding via Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning," Papers 2506.13113, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.
    10. Axel Ockenfels & David Reiley & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2006. "Online Auctions," NBER Working Papers 12785, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Satterthwaite, Mark A. & Williams, Steven R. & Zachariadis, Konstantinos E., 2022. "Price discovery using a double auction," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 57-83.
    12. repec:aep:anales:4827 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Swider, Derk J. & Weber, Christoph, 2007. "Bidding under price uncertainty in multi-unit pay-as-bid procurement auctions for power systems reserve," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1297-1308, September.
    14. Rachel R. Chen & Robin O. Roundy & Rachel Q. Zhang & Ganesh Janakiraman, 2005. "Efficient Auction Mechanisms for Supply Chain Procurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 467-482, March.
    15. Paul Klemperer, 2002. "What Really Matters in Auction Design," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 169-189, Winter.
    16. Chu, Sing-Fat & Koh, Winston T. H. & Tse, Yiu Kuen, 2004. "Expectations formation and forecasting of vehicle demand: an empirical study of the vehicle quota auctions in Singapore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 367-381, June.
    17. Çağıl Koçyiğit & Garud Iyengar & Daniel Kuhn & Wolfram Wiesemann, 2020. "Distributionally Robust Mechanism Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 159-189, January.
    18. Víctor M. Gómez‐Blanco, 2024. "A safe asset in early modern Castile, 1543–1714," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 77(1), pages 212-243, February.
    19. Ramanathan Subramaniam & R. Venkatesh, 2009. "Optimal Bundling Strategies in Multiobject Auctions of Complements or Substitutes," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 264-273, 03-04.
    20. Schamel, Guenter, 2004. "Ebay Economics: Factors That Determine Online Auction Prices," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20407, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    21. Chu, Singfat, 2012. "Allocation flexibility and price efficiency within Singapore’s Vehicle Quota System," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1541-1550.

    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:2511.21802. 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.