-
Regulation of Algorithmic Collusion, Refined: Testing Pessimistic Calibrated Regret
Authors:
Jason D. Hartline,
Chang Wang,
Chenhao Zhang
Abstract:
We study the regulation of algorithmic (non-)collusion amongst sellers in dynamic imperfect price competition by auditing their data as introduced by Hartline et al. [2024].
We develop an auditing method that tests whether a seller's pessimistic calibrated regret is low. The pessimistic calibrated regret is the highest calibrated regret of outcomes compatible with the observed data. This method…
▽ More
We study the regulation of algorithmic (non-)collusion amongst sellers in dynamic imperfect price competition by auditing their data as introduced by Hartline et al. [2024].
We develop an auditing method that tests whether a seller's pessimistic calibrated regret is low. The pessimistic calibrated regret is the highest calibrated regret of outcomes compatible with the observed data. This method relaxes the previous requirement that a pricing algorithm must use fully-supported price distributions to be auditable. This method is at least as permissive as any auditing method that has a high probability of failing algorithmic outcomes with non-vanishing calibrated regret. Additionally, we strengthen the justification for using vanishing calibrated regret, versus vanishing best-in-hindsight regret, as the non-collusion definition, by showing that even without any side information, the pricing algorithms that only satisfy weaker vanishing best-in-hindsight regret allow an opponent to manipulate them into posting supra-competitive prices. This manipulation cannot be excluded with a non-collusion definition of vanishing best-in-hindsight regret.
We motivate and interpret the approach of auditing algorithms from their data as suggesting a per se rule. However, we demonstrate that it is possible for algorithms to pass the audit by pretending to have higher costs than they actually do. For such scenarios, the rule of reason can be applied to bound the range of costs to those that are reasonable for the domain.
△ Less
Submitted 16 January, 2025;
originally announced January 2025.
-
Regulation of Algorithmic Collusion
Authors:
Jason D. Hartline,
Sheng Long,
Chenhao Zhang
Abstract:
Consider sellers in a competitive market that use algorithms to adapt their prices from data that they collect. In such a context it is plausible that algorithms could arrive at prices that are higher than the competitive prices and this may benefit sellers at the expense of consumers (i.e., the buyers in the market). This paper gives a definition of plausible algorithmic non-collusion for pricing…
▽ More
Consider sellers in a competitive market that use algorithms to adapt their prices from data that they collect. In such a context it is plausible that algorithms could arrive at prices that are higher than the competitive prices and this may benefit sellers at the expense of consumers (i.e., the buyers in the market). This paper gives a definition of plausible algorithmic non-collusion for pricing algorithms. The definition allows a regulator to empirically audit algorithms by applying a statistical test to the data that they collect. Algorithms that are good, i.e., approximately optimize prices to market conditions, can be augmented to contain the data sufficient to pass the audit. Algorithms that have colluded on, e.g., supra-competitive prices cannot pass the audit. The definition allows sellers to possess useful side information that may be correlated with supply and demand and could affect the prices used by good algorithms. The paper provides an analysis of the statistical complexity of such an audit, i.e., how much data is sufficient for the test of non-collusion to be accurate.
△ Less
Submitted 29 September, 2024; v1 submitted 28 January, 2024;
originally announced January 2024.
-
Optimal Scoring Rules for Multi-dimensional Effort
Authors:
Jason D. Hartline,
Liren Shan,
Yingkai Li,
Yifan Wu
Abstract:
This paper develops a framework for the design of scoring rules to optimally incentivize an agent to exert a multi-dimensional effort. This framework is a generalization to strategic agents of the classical knapsack problem (cf. Briest, Krysta, and Vöcking, 2005, Singer, 2010) and it is foundational to applying algorithmic mechanism design to the classroom. The paper identifies two simple families…
▽ More
This paper develops a framework for the design of scoring rules to optimally incentivize an agent to exert a multi-dimensional effort. This framework is a generalization to strategic agents of the classical knapsack problem (cf. Briest, Krysta, and Vöcking, 2005, Singer, 2010) and it is foundational to applying algorithmic mechanism design to the classroom. The paper identifies two simple families of scoring rules that guarantee constant approximations to the optimal scoring rule. The truncated separate scoring rule is the sum of single dimensional scoring rules that is truncated to the bounded range of feasible scores. The threshold scoring rule gives the maximum score if reports exceed a threshold and zero otherwise. Approximate optimality of one or the other of these rules is similar to the bundling or selling separately result of Babaioff, Immorlica, Lucier, and Weinberg (2014). Finally, we show that the approximate optimality of the best of those two simple scoring rules is robust when the agent's choice of effort is made sequentially.
△ Less
Submitted 29 June, 2023; v1 submitted 6 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
A/B Testing of Auctions
Authors:
Shuchi Chawla,
Jason D. Hartline,
Denis Nekipelov
Abstract:
For many application areas A/B testing, which partitions users of a system into an A (control) and B (treatment) group to experiment between several application designs, enables Internet companies to optimize their services to the behavioral patterns of their users. Unfortunately, the A/B testing framework cannot be applied in a straightforward manner to applications like auctions where the users…
▽ More
For many application areas A/B testing, which partitions users of a system into an A (control) and B (treatment) group to experiment between several application designs, enables Internet companies to optimize their services to the behavioral patterns of their users. Unfortunately, the A/B testing framework cannot be applied in a straightforward manner to applications like auctions where the users (a.k.a., bidders) submit bids before the partitioning into the A and B groups is made. This paper combines auction theoretic modeling with the A/B testing framework to develop methodology for A/B testing auctions. The accuracy of our method %, assuming the auction is directly comparable to ideal A/B testing where there is no interference between A and B. Our results are based on an extension and improved analysis of the inference method of Chawla et al. (2014).
△ Less
Submitted 2 June, 2016;
originally announced June 2016.