IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2604.01416.html

Pay-Per-Crawl Pricing for AI: The LM-Tree Agent

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Archer
  • Soheil Ghili
  • Nima Haghpanah

Abstract

As AI systems shift from directing users to content toward consuming it directly, publishers need a new revenue model: charging AI crawlers for content access. This model, called pay-per-crawl, must solve a problem of mechanism selection at scale: content is too heterogeneous for a fixed pricing framework. Different sub-types warrant not only different price levels but different pricing rules based on different unstructured features, and there are too many to enumerate or design by hand. We propose the LM Tree, an adaptive pricing agent that grows a segmentation tree over the content library, using LLMs to discover what distinguishes high-value from low-value items and apply those attributes at scale, from binary purchase feedback alone. We evaluate the LM Tree on real content from a major German technology publisher, using 8,939 articles and 80,451 buyer queries with willingness-to-pay calibrated from actual AI crawler traffic. The LM Tree achieves a 65% revenue gain over a single static price and a 47% gain over two-category pricing, outperforming even the publisher's own 8-segment editorial taxonomy by 40% -- recovering content distinctions the publisher's own categories miss.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Archer & Soheil Ghili & Nima Haghpanah, 2026. "Pay-Per-Crawl Pricing for AI: The LM-Tree Agent," Papers 2604.01416, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2604.01416
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.01416
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nima Haghpanah & Jason Hartline, 2021. "When Is Pure Bundling Optimal? [Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(3), pages 1127-1156.
    2. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    3. Kanishka Misra & Eric M. Schwartz & Jacob Abernethy, 2019. "Dynamic Online Pricing with Incomplete Information Using Multiarmed Bandit Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(2), pages 226-252, March.
    4. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
    5. Jean-Pierre Dubé & Sanjog Misra, 2023. "Personalized Pricing and Consumer Welfare," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(1), pages 131-189.
    6. Omar Besbes & Assaf Zeevi, 2009. "Dynamic Pricing Without Knowing the Demand Function: Risk Bounds and Near-Optimal Algorithms," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1407-1420, December.
    7. Eric Maskin & John Riley, 1984. "Monopoly with Incomplete Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(2), pages 171-196, Summer.
    8. Nima Haghpanah & Ron Siegel, 2022. "The Limits of Multiproduct Price Discrimination," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 443-458, December.
    9. Soheil Ghili & K. Sudhir & Nitish Jain & Ankur Garg, 2025. "Second-degree Price Discrimination: Theoretical Analysis, Experiment Design, and Empirical Estimation," Papers 2507.13426, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    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. Soheil Ghili & Russ Yoon, 2023. "An Empirical Analysis of Optimal Nonlinear Pricing in Business-to-Business Markets," Papers 2302.11643, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    2. Han, Jun & Weber, Thomas A., 2023. "Price discrimination with robust beliefs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(2), pages 795-809.
    3. Ali Goli & David H. Reiley & Hongkai Zhang, 2025. "Personalizing Ad Load to Optimize Subscription and Ad Revenues: Product Strategies Constructed from Experiments on Pandora," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 327-352, March.
    4. Julie Holland Mortimer, 2007. "Price Discrimination, Copyright Law, and Technological Innovation: Evidence from the Introduction of DVDs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1307-1350.
    5. Dirk Bergemann & Alessandro Bonatti, 2024. "Data, Competition, and Digital Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(8), pages 2553-2595, August.
    6. Renato Gomes & Alessandro Pavan, 2013. "Cross-Subsidization and Matching Design," Discussion Papers 1559, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    7. Dennis L. Gärtner, 2010. "Monopolistic screening under learning by doing," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 574-597, September.
    8. Tian Xia & Richard Sexton, 2010. "Brand or Variety Choices and Periodic Sales as Substitute Instruments for Monopoly Price Discrimination," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 36(4), pages 333-349, June.
    9. Laurence Jacquet & Etienne lehmann & Bruno Van Der Linden, 2012. "Signing distortions in optimal tax or other adverse selection models with random participation," Thema Working Papers 2012-27, THEMA (Théorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), CY Cergy-Paris University, ESSEC and CNRS.
    10. Liang Guo, 2025. "Selling Data to Marketers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(10), pages 8823-8841, October.
    11. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2015. "The Limits of Price Discrimination," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 921-957, March.
    12. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    13. Veiga, André, 2018. "A note on how to sell a network good," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 114-126.
    14. Alessandro Bonatti, 2008. "Continuous-Time Screening Contracts," 2008 Meeting Papers 493, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    15. Yao Luo & Isabelle Perrigne & Quang Vuong, 2018. "Structural Analysis of Nonlinear Pricing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(6), pages 2523-2568.
    16. Friedrichsen, Jana, 2013. "Image concerns and the provision of quality," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2013-211, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    17. Bester, Helmut & Strausz, Roland, 2007. "Contracting with imperfect commitment and noisy communication," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 236-259, September.
    18. Gauthier, Stéphane & Laroque, Guy, 2014. "On the value of randomization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 493-507.
    19. Luca Lambertini, 2007. "Dynamic Spatial Monopoly with Product Development," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2), pages 157-166.
    20. Pietro Dall'Ara & Elia Sartori, 2026. "Screening in digital monopolies," Papers 2602.13014, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2026.

    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:2604.01416. 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.