IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2602.22750.html

The Inference Bottleneck: Antitrust and Neutrality Duties in the Age of Cognitive Infrastructure

Author

Listed:
  • Gaston Besanson
  • Marcelo Celani

Abstract

As generative AI commercializes, competitive advantage is shifting from one-time model training toward continuous inference, distribution, and routing. At the frontier, large-scale inference can function as cognitive infrastructure: a bottleneck input that downstream applications rely on to compete, controlled by firms that often compete downstream through integrated assistants, productivity suites, and developer tooling. Foreclosure risk is not limited to price. It can be executed through non-price discrimination (latency, throughput, error rates, context limits, feature gating) and, where models select tools and services, through steering and default routing that is difficult to observe and harder to litigate. This essay makes three moves. First, it defines cognitive infrastructure as a falsifiable concept built around measurable reliance, vertical incentives, and discrimination capacity, without assuming a clean market definition. Second, it frames theories of harm using raising-rivals'-costs logic for vertically related and platform markets, where foreclosure can be profitable without anticompetitive pricing. Third, it proposes Neutral Inference: a targeted, auditable conduct approach built around (i) quality-of-service parity, (ii) routing transparency, and (iii) FRAND-style non-discrimination for similarly situated buyers, applied only when observable evidence indicates functional gatekeeper status.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaston Besanson & Marcelo Celani, 2026. "The Inference Bottleneck: Antitrust and Neutrality Duties in the Age of Cognitive Infrastructure," Papers 2602.22750, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2602.22750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.22750
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Armstrong, 2006. "Competition in two‐sided markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(3), pages 668-691, September.
    2. Michele Bisceglia & Jorge Padilla & Salvatore Piccolo & Shiva Shekhar, 2022. "Vertical integration, innovation and foreclosure with competing ecosystems," Post-Print hal-04931197, HAL.
    3. Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1987. "Cost-Raising Strategies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 19-34, September.
    4. Bisceglia, Michele & Padilla, Jorge & Piccolo, Salvatore & Shekhar, Shiva, 2022. "Vertical integration, innovation and foreclosure with competing ecosystems," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    5. Jean-Charles Rochet & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(4), pages 990-1029, June.
    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. Nagler Matthew G., 2007. "Understanding the Internet's Relevance to Media Ownership Policy: A Model of Too Many Choices," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, June.
    2. Wu, WenTing & Chen, XiaoQian & Zvarych, Roman & Huang, WeiLun, 2024. "The Stackelberg duel between Central Bank Digital Currencies and private payment titans in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    3. Amelio, Andrea & Giardino-Karlinger, Liliane & Valletti, Tommaso, 2020. "Exclusionary pricing in two-sided markets," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    4. Zhan (Michael) Shi & T. S. Raghu, 2020. "An Economic Analysis of Product Recommendation in the Presence of Quality and Taste-Match Heterogeneity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 399-411, June.
    5. Claude Crampes & Carole Haritchabalet & Bruno Jullien, 2009. "Advertising, Competition And Entry In Media Industries," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 7-31, March.
    6. Jean-Michel Sahut & Luca Iandoli & Frédéric Teulon, 2021. "The age of digital entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1159-1169, February.
    7. Prabirendra Chatterjee & Bo Zhou, 2021. "Sponsored Content Advertising in a Two-Sided Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7560-7574, December.
    8. Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer, 2016. "The economics of the Internet: an overview," Chapters, in: Johannes M. Bauer & Michael Latzer (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of the Internet, chapter 1, pages 3-20, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Moraga-Gonzalez, Jose L. & Wildenbeest, Matthijs R., 2011. "Comparison sites," IESE Research Papers D/933, IESE Business School.
      • Jose Luis Moraga-Gonzalez & Matthijs R. Wildenbeest, 2011. "Comparison Sites," Working Papers 2011-04, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    10. Bach Quang Ho & Yuki Inoue, 2020. "Driving Network Externalities in Education for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Christopher Müller & Enrico Böhme, 2014. "The Monopoly Benchmark on Two-Sided Markets," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 56-69, Autumn.
    12. Esther Gal-Or & Ronen Gal-Or & Nabita Penmetsa, 2018. "The Role of User Privacy Concerns in Shaping Competition Among Platforms," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 698-722, September.
    13. Alexander Matros, 2006. "Optimal Mechanisms for an Auction Mediator," Working Paper 202, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2006.
    14. Marc Ivaldi & Catherine Muller-Vibes, 2018. "The differentiated effect of advertising on readership: evidence from a two-sided market approach," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 363-376, September.
    15. Tiffany Ding & Dominique Perrault-Joncas & Orit Ronen & Michael I. Jordan & Dirk Bergemann & Dean Foster & Omer Gottesman, 2025. "Marketplace Operators Can Induce Competitive Pricing," Papers 2503.06582, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    16. Yifan Dou & D. J. Wu, 2021. "Platform Competition Under Network Effects: Piggybacking and Optimal Subsidization," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 820-835, September.
    17. Sun, Cheng, 2025. "Managing the advertising intensity: The role of the marginal disutility from advertising," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 255(C).
    18. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    19. Hui Li & Qiaowei Shen & Yakov Bart, 2018. "Local Market Characteristics and Online-to-Offline Commerce: An Empirical Analysis of Groupon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 1860-1878, April.
    20. Jin Li & Gary Pisano & Yejia Xu & Feng Zhu, 2023. "Marketplace Scalability and Strategic Use of Platform Investment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(7), pages 3958-3975, July.

    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:2602.22750. 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.