Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userLearning Fair Equilibria in Sponsored Search Auctions
169
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Andrea Celli
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
In this work we investigate the strategic learning implications of the deployment of sponsored search auction mechanisms that obey to fairness criteria. We introduce a new class of mechanisms composing a traditional Generalized Second Price auction (GSP) with different fair division schemes to achieve some desired level of fairness between two groups of Bayesian strategic advertisers. We propose two mechanisms, $beta$-Fair GSP and GSP-EFX, that compose GSP with, respectively, an envy-free up to one item (EF1), and an envy-free up to any item (EFX) fair division scheme. The payments of GSP are adjusted in order to compensate the advertisers that suffer a loss of efficiency due the fair division stage. We prove that, for both mechanisms, if bidders play so as to minimize their external regret they are guaranteed to reach an equilibrium with good social welfare. We also prove that the mechanisms are budget balanced, so that the payments charged by the traditional GSP mechanism are a good proxy of the total compensation offered to the advertisers. Finally, we evaluate the quality of the allocations of the two mechanisms through experiments on real-world data.
rate research
Read More
Sponsored Search Auctions (SSAs) arguably represent the problem at the intersection of computer science and economics with the deepest applications in real life. Within the realm of SSAs, the study of the effects that showing one ad has on the other ads, a.k.a. externalities in economics, is of utmost importance and has so far attracted the attention of much research. However, even the basic question of modeling the problem has so far escaped a definitive answer. The popular cascade model is arguably too idealized to really describe the phenomenon yet it allows a good comprehension of the problem. Other models, instead, describe the setting more adequately but are too complex to permit a satisfactory theoretical analysis. In this work, we attempt to get the best of both approaches: firstly, we define a number of general mathematical formulations for the problem in the attempt to have a rich description of externalities in SSAs and, secondly, prove a host of results drawing a nearly complete picture about the computational complexity of the problem. We complement these approximability results with some considerations about mechanism design in our context.
In this study, we apply reinforcement learning techniques and propose what we call reinforcement mechanism design to tackle the dynamic pricing problem in sponsored search auctions. In contrast to previous game-theoretical approaches that heavily rely on rationality and common knowledge among the bidders, we take a data-driven approach, and try to learn, over repeated interactions, the set of optimal reserve prices. We implement our approach within the current sponsored search framework of a major search engine: we first train a buyer behavior model, via a real bidding data set, that accurately predicts bids given information that bidders are aware of, including the game parameters disclosed by the search engine, as well as the bidders KPI data from previous rounds. We then put forward a reinforcement/MDP (Markov Decision Process) based algorithm that optimizes reserve prices over time, in a GSP-like auction. Our simulations demonstrate that our framework outperforms static optimization strategies including the ones that are currently in use, as well as several other dynamic ones.
This paper studies equilibrium quality of semi-separable position auctions (known as the Ad Types setting) with greedy or optimal allocation combined with generalized second-price (GSP) or Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) pricing. We make three contributions: first, we give upper and lower bounds on the Price of Anarchy (PoA) for auctions which use greedy allocation with GSP pricing, greedy allocations with VCG pricing, and optimal allocation with GSP pricing. Second, we give Bayes-Nash equilibrium characterizations for two-player, two-slot instances (for all auction formats) and show that there exists both a revenue hierarchy and revenue equivalence across some formats. Finally, we use no-regret learning algorithms and bidding data from a large online advertising platform and no-regret learning algorithms to evaluate the performance of the mechanisms under semi-realistic conditions. For welfare, we find that the optimal-to-realized welfare ratio (an empirical PoA analogue) is broadly better than our upper bounds on PoA; For revenue, we find that the hierarchy in practice may sometimes agree with simple theory, but generally appears sensitive to the underlying distribution of bidder valuations.
We study correlated equilibria and coarse equilibria of simple first-price single-item auctions in the simplest auction model of full information. Nash equilibria are known to always yield full efficiency and a revenue that is at least the second-highest value. We prove that the same is true for all correlated equilibria, even those in which agents overbid -- i.e., bid above their values. Coarse equilibria, in contrast, may yield lower efficiency and revenue. We show that the revenue can be as low as 26% of the second-highest value in a coarse equilibrium, even if agents are assumed not to overbid, and this is tight. We also show that when players do not overbid, the worst-case bound on social welfare at coarse equilibrium improves from 63% of the highest value to 81%, and this bound is tight as well.
A mediator is a well-known construct in game theory, and is an entity that plays on behalf of some of the agents who choose to use its services, while the rest of the agents participate in the game directly. We initiate a game theoretic study of sponsored search auctions, such as those used by Google and Yahoo!, involving {em incentive driven} mediators. We refer to such mediators as {em for-profit} mediators, so as to distinguish them from mediators introduced in prior work, who have no monetary incentives, and are driven by the altruistic goal of implementing certain desired outcomes. We show that in our model, (i) players/advertisers can improve their payoffs by choosing to use the services of the mediator, compared to directly participating in the auction; (ii) the mediator can obtain monetary benefit by managing the advertising burden of its group of advertisers; and (iii) the payoffs of the mediator and the advertisers it plays for are compatible with the incentive constraints from the advertisers who do dot use its services. A simple intuition behind the above result comes from the observation that the mediator has more information about and more control over the bid profile than any individual advertiser, allowing her to reduce the payments made to the auctioneer, while still maintaining incentive constraints. Further, our results indicate that there are significant opportunities for diversification in the internet economy and we should expect it to continue to develop richer structure, with room for different types of agents to coexist.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
