IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2603.20683.html

Distribution-Free Equilibrium in Search Contests

Author

Listed:
  • Emre Ozdenoren
  • Murat Erkurt

Abstract

We study a contest in which $N$ players sequentially draw from a distribution as many times as they want at a fixed cost per draw, with no recall, and the highest accepted value wins a prize. In the unique symmetric equilibrium, the acceptance probability, expected search cost, and players' payoffs do not depend on the underlying distribution. Total search expenditure equals the prize (full rent dissipation). These distribution-free equilibrium properties extend to multiple prizes and to hierarchical competition among designers. The efficient prize that aligns competitive incentives with the social optimum is distribution-dependent: heavy-tailed distributions require much larger prizes. With finite number of draws, adding competitors can raise the quality threshold when search costs are low, reversing the discouragement of the unlimited-draw case. A planner choosing both the prize and the field size always prefers the minimum field ($N=2$) with unlimited draws, but heavy-tailed distributions and finitely many draws favor larger fields, as breadth of parallel exploration compensates for limited depth of individual search.

Suggested Citation

  • Emre Ozdenoren & Murat Erkurt, 2026. "Distribution-Free Equilibrium in Search Contests," Papers 2603.20683, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2603.20683
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.20683
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    2. Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2008. "The Optimal Allocation of Prizes in Contests," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 615-631, Springer.
    3. Drugov, Mikhail & Ryvkin, Dmitry, 2020. "Tournament rewards and heavy tails," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    4. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    5. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 2003. "Optimal Design of Research Contests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 646-671, June.
    6. Michael R. Baye & Dan Kovenock & Casper G. Vries, 1996. "The all-pay auction with complete information," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 209-223, Springer.
    7. Hoppe-Wewetzer, Heidrun & Katsenos, Georgios & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2023. "The effects of rivalry on scientific progress under public vs private learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Kevin J. Boudreau & Nicola Lacetera & Karim R. Lakhani, 2011. "Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 843-863, May.
    9. Ufuk Akcigit & Qingmin Liu, 2016. "The Role of Information in Innovation and Competition," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 828-870.
    10. Godfrey Keller & Sven Rady & Martin Cripps, 2005. "Strategic Experimentation with Exponential Bandits," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(1), pages 39-68, January.
    11. Patrick Bolton & Christopher Harris, 1999. "Strategic Experimentation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(2), pages 349-374, March.
    12. Richard L. Fullerton & R. Preston McAfee, 1999. "Auctioning Entry into Tournaments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 573-605, June.
    13. Glenn C. Loury, 1979. "Market Structure and Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 93(3), pages 395-410.
    14. J. J. McCall, 1970. "Economics of Information and Job Search," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(1), pages 113-126.
    15. Taylor, Curtis R, 1995. "Digging for Golden Carrots: An Analysis of Research Tournaments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 872-890, September.
    16. Ely Dahan & Haim Mendelson, 2001. "An Extreme-Value Model of Concept Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 102-116, January.
    17. Aoyagi, Masaki, 2010. "Information feedback in a dynamic tournament," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 242-260, November.
    18. Marina Halac & Navin Kartik & Qingmin Liu, 2017. "Contests for Experimentation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(5), pages 1523-1569.
    19. Seel, Christian & Strack, Philipp, 2013. "Gambling in contests," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(5), pages 2033-2048.
    20. Florian Ederer, 2010. "Feedback and Motivation in Dynamic Tournaments," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 733-769, September.
    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. Jürgen Mihm & Jochen Schlapp, 2019. "Sourcing Innovation: On Feedback in Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 559-576, February.
    2. Pavel Kireyev, 2016. "Markets for Ideas: Prize Structure, Entry Limits, and the Design of Ideation Contests," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-129, Harvard Business School.
    3. Dmitry Ryvkin, 2022. "To Fight or to Give Up? Dynamic Contests with a Deadline," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 8144-8165, November.
    4. Hu, Feng & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E., 2020. "The impact of innovation contest briefs on the quality of solvers and solutions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    5. Kostas Bimpikis & Shayan Ehsani & Mohamed Mostagir, 2019. "Designing Dynamic Contests," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 339-356, March.
    6. Ming Hu & Lu Wang, 2021. "Joint vs. Separate Crowdsourcing Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2711-2728, May.
    7. Sina Khorasani & Lakshminarayana Nittala & Vish V. Krishnan, 2023. "Screening in Multistage Contests," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 2249-2267, November.
    8. Lakshminarayana Nittala & Sanjiv Erat & Vish Krishnan, 2022. "Designing internal innovation contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 1963-1976, May.
    9. Shanglyu Deng & Hanming Fang & Qiang Fu & Zenan Wu, 2023. "Information Favoritism and Scoring Bias in Contests," NBER Working Papers 31036, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    11. Bo Chen & Bo Chen & Dmitriy Knyazev, 2022. "Information disclosure in dynamic research contests," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 113-137, March.
    12. Dong, Xiaoqi & Fu, Qiang & Serena, Marco & Wu, Zenan, 2025. "R&D contest design with resource allocation and entry fees," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 238(C).
    13. Brookins, Philip & Matros, Alexander & Tzachrista, Foteini, 2025. "Sequential contests with incomplete information: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    14. Sina Khorasani & Ersin Körpeoğlu & Vish V. Krishnan, 2024. "Dynamic Development Contests," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 43-59, January.
    15. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    16. Xu Tian & Gongbing Bi, 2022. "Multiplicative output form and its applications to problems in the homogenous innovation contest model," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 44(3), pages 709-732, September.
    17. Laurence Ales & Soo-Haeng Cho & Ersin Körpeoğlu, 2017. "Optimal Award Scheme in Innovation Tournaments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 693-702, June.
    18. Sanjiv Erat & Vish Krishnan, 2012. "Managing Delegated Search Over Design Spaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 606-623, March.
    19. Daniel P. Gross, 2017. "Performance feedback in competitive product development," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(2), pages 438-466, May.
    20. Matros, Alexander & Smirnov, Vladimir, 2011. "Treasure game," Working Papers 2011-10, University of Sydney, School of Economics, revised May 2014.

    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:2603.20683. 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.