IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2606.10438.html

Sequential Search with Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Ruhi Sonal
  • Saptarshi Mukherjee
  • Abhinaba Lahiri
  • Aniruddha Ghosh

Abstract

Sequential development of a new product or technology, or natural resource exploration, often progresses through ordered stages with uncertain rewards and requires costly (ex ante) planning to make future stages accessible. We model this process as an ordered Pandora's box problem where a decision-maker first chooses an initial scope, paying a cost that rises with the number of stages made accessible, and may later expand the scope at a marginal adjustment cost. Since the paid planning costs are sunk, the continuation values depend on the state variable ``paid scope''. We prove existence and uniqueness of scope-dependent reservation values, characterize the optimal search strategy as a threshold rule indexed by paid scope, and derive comparative statics. Interactions among three economic forces shape the optimal behavior -- a guarantee effect (a higher current best offer reduces the expected improvement from the next stage and induces earlier stopping), a paid-scope effect (a larger prepaid scope lowers the marginal cost of future access, raises the continuation value, and supports continuation at higher guarantees), and a remaining-horizon effect (fewer stages remaining shrink the option value of continuing). Two examples illustrate how these forces generate distinct planning and search patterns under normal and fat-tailed rewards.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruhi Sonal & Saptarshi Mukherjee & Abhinaba Lahiri & Aniruddha Ghosh, 2026. "Sequential Search with Planning," Papers 2606.10438, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2606.10438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2606.10438
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberts, Kevin & Weitzman, Martin L, 1981. "Funding Criteria for Research, Development, and Exploration Projects," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(5), pages 1261-1288, September.
    2. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    3. Farzin, Y. H. & Huisman, K. J. M. & Kort, P. M., 1998. "Optimal timing of technology adoption," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 779-799, May.
    4. Paul Klemperer, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
    5. Doval, Laura, 2018. "Whether or not to open Pandora's box," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 127-158.
    6. Philippe Aghion & Christopher Harris & Peter Howitt & John Vickers, 2001. "Competition, Imitation and Growth with Step-by-Step Innovation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 68(3), pages 467-492.
    7. Joosung Lee & Daniel Li, 2022. "Sequential Search With Adaptive Intensity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 803-829, May.
    8. Debraj Ray & Arthur Robson, 2018. "Certified Random: A New Order for Coauthorship," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 489-520, February.
    9. Christopher Harris & John Vickers, 1987. "Racing with Uncertainty," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 1-21.
    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. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit, 2006. "State-Dependent Intellectual Property Rights Policy," NBER Working Papers 12775, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Ke, T. Tony & Villas-Boas, J. Miguel, 2019. "Optimal learning before choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 383-437.
    3. Zihao Chen & Xingyu Fu & Pin Gao & Ying-Ju Chen, 2026. "Sound of Silence: When to Conceal Attribute Information? The Roles of Consumer Search, Inventory, and Channel Structure," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 783-801, May.
    4. Keller, Godfrey & Novák, Vladimír & Willems, Tim, 2019. "A note on optimal experimentation under risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 476-487.
    5. Denicolò, Vincenzo & Zanchettin, Piercarlo, 2012. "A dynamic model of patent portfolio races," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 924-927.
    6. Ziv Scully & Laura Doval, 2024. "Local hedging approximately solves Pandora's box problems with nonobligatory inspection," Papers 2410.19011, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    7. Catherine Bobtcheff & Christian Gollier & Richard Zeckhauser, 2008. "Resource allocations when projects have ranges of increasing returns," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 93-93, August.
    8. Pak Hung Au & Mark Whitmeyer, 2018. "Attraction versus Persuasion: Information Provision in Search Markets," Papers 1802.09396, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    9. Fershtman, Chaim & Markovich, Sarit, 2010. "Patents, imitation and licensing in an asymmetric dynamic R&D race," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 113-126, March.
    10. Hedyeh Beyhaghi & Linda Cai, 2023. "Recent Developments in Pandora's Box Problem: Variants and Applications," Papers 2308.12242, arXiv.org.
    11. Karén Hovhannissian & Marco Valente, 2004. "Modeling Directed Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes: Depth and Breadth," ROCK Working Papers 028, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 17 Jun 2008.
    12. Malte Mosel, 2009. "Competition, imitation, and R&D productivity in agrowth model with sector-specific patent protection," Working Papers 084, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    13. Asaf Cohen & Eilon Solan, 2013. "Bandit Problems with Lévy Processes," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 92-107, February.
    14. Petrikaitė, Vaiva, 2022. "Escaping search when buying," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    15. Philipp Weinschenk, 2010. "Increasing Workload in a Stochastic Environment," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2010_43, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics.
    16. Yang, Jinrui, 2016. "Monopoly VS Competition: Market Structure’s Impact on Product Innovation-with Endogenous Quality of New Product," MPRA Paper 70094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Klimenko, Mikhail M., 2004. "Industrial targeting, experimentation and long-run specialization," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 75-105, February.
    18. Rafael P. Greminger, 2022. "Optimal Search and Discovery," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(5), pages 3904-3924, May.
    19. Mohammad Reza Aminian & Vahideh Manshadi & Rad Niazadeh, 2025. "Markovian Search with Ex-Ante Constraints: Theory and Applications to Socially Aware Algorithmic Hiring," Papers 2501.13346, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2025.
    20. Manuel Mueller-Frank & Mallesh M. Pai, 2016. "Social Learning with Costly Search," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 83-109, February.

    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:2606.10438. 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: https://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.