Most of the work in auction design literature assumes that bidders behave rationally based on the information available for each individual auction. However, in today's online advertising markets, one of the most important real-life applications of auction design, the data and computational power required to bid optimally are only available to the auction designer, and an advertiser can only participate by setting performance objectives (clicks, conversions, etc.) for the campaign. In this paper, we focus on value-maximizing campaigns with return-on-investment (ROI) constraints, which is widely adopted in many global-scale auto-bidding platforms. Through theoretical analysis and empirical experiments on both synthetic and realistic data, we find that second price auction exhibits many undesirable properties and loses its dominant theoretical advantages in single-item scenarios. In particular, second price auction brings equilibrium multiplicity, non-monotonicity, vulnerability to exploitation by both bidders and even auctioneers, and PPAD-hardness for the system to reach a steady-state. We also explore the broader impacts of the auto-bidding mechanism beyond efficiency and strategyproofness. In particular, the multiplicity of equilibria and the input sensitivity make advertisers' utilities unstable. In addition, the interference among both bidders and advertising slots introduces bias into A/B testing, which hinders the development of even non-bidding components of the platform. The aforementioned phenomena have been widely observed in practice, and our results indicate that one of the reasons might be intrinsic to the underlying auto-bidding mechanism. To deal with these challenges, we provide suggestions and candidate solutions for practitioners.


翻译:暂无翻译

0
下载
关闭预览

相关内容

机器学习入门的经验与建议
专知会员服务
94+阅读 · 2019年10月10日
Hierarchically Structured Meta-learning
CreateAMind
27+阅读 · 2019年5月22日
Transferring Knowledge across Learning Processes
CreateAMind
29+阅读 · 2019年5月18日
强化学习的Unsupervised Meta-Learning
CreateAMind
18+阅读 · 2019年1月7日
Unsupervised Learning via Meta-Learning
CreateAMind
44+阅读 · 2019年1月3日
【推荐】RNN/LSTM时序预测
机器学习研究会
25+阅读 · 2017年9月8日
国家自然科学基金
0+阅读 · 2013年12月31日
国家自然科学基金
1+阅读 · 2012年12月31日
国家自然科学基金
0+阅读 · 2009年12月31日
Arxiv
0+阅读 · 2023年6月19日
VIP会员
相关资讯
Hierarchically Structured Meta-learning
CreateAMind
27+阅读 · 2019年5月22日
Transferring Knowledge across Learning Processes
CreateAMind
29+阅读 · 2019年5月18日
强化学习的Unsupervised Meta-Learning
CreateAMind
18+阅读 · 2019年1月7日
Unsupervised Learning via Meta-Learning
CreateAMind
44+阅读 · 2019年1月3日
【推荐】RNN/LSTM时序预测
机器学习研究会
25+阅读 · 2017年9月8日
相关基金
Top
微信扫码咨询专知VIP会员