Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets
Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Management science 2022-12, Vol.68 (12), p.8515-8535 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 8535 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 8515 |
container_title | Management science |
container_volume | 68 |
creator | Conitzer, Vincent |
description | Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literature do not apply directly. In this paper, we take the perspective of a budget management system that surfaces aggregated incentives—instead of individual auctions—and compare first and second price auctions. We show that theory offers surprising endorsement for using a first price auction to sell individual impressions. In particular, first price auctions guarantee uniqueness of the steady-state equilibrium of the budget management system, monotonicity, and other desirable properties, as well as efficient computation through the solution to the well-studied Eisenberg–Gale convex program. Contrary to what one can expect from first price auctions, we show that incentives issues are not a barrier that undermines the system. Using realistic instances generated from data collected at real-world auction platforms, we show that bidders have small regret with respect to their optimal ex post strategy, and they do not have a big incentive to misreport when they can influence equilibria directly by giving inputs strategically. Finally, budget-constrained bidders, who have significant prevalence in real-world platforms, tend to have smaller regrets. Our computations indicate that bidder budgets, pacing multipliers, and regrets all have a positive association in statistical terms.
This paper was accepted by Gabriel Weintraub, revenue management and market analytics.
Funding:
D. Panigrahi was supported in part by the National Science Foundation [Awards CCF 1535972, CCF 1750140, and CCF 1955703].
Supplemental Material:
The data files are available at
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310
. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2760885168</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2760885168</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-f05b0bed1fb7a004cebcdc623689e1c9b4fa9c4bc02727804f96ed9266b0df973</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkD1PwzAYhC0EEqWwMkdiTnjtxF9jVbWAVEQHmK3YsZFL47R2MvDvSRQkRqZbnruTHoTuMRSYCP7YhmQKAoQUVYnhAi0wJSynFPAlWgAQmmMJ8hrdpHQAAC44WyC8r40Pn9nmPPij19EPbeZDtvUx9dk-emOz1WB634XstY5ftk-36MrVx2TvfnOJPrab9_Vzvnt7elmvdrkpOfS5A6pB2wY7zWuAylhtGsNIyYS02EhduVqaShsgnHABlZPMNpIwpqFxkpdL9DDvnmJ3Hmzq1aEbYhgvFeEMhKCYiZEqZsrELqVonTpF39bxW2FQkxY1aVGTFjVpGQvZXLCmCz794aJigkEp6IjkM-KD62Kb_pv8AcxebkE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2760885168</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets</title><source>INFORMS PubsOnLine</source><creator>Conitzer, Vincent</creator><creatorcontrib>Conitzer, Vincent</creatorcontrib><description>Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literature do not apply directly. In this paper, we take the perspective of a budget management system that surfaces aggregated incentives—instead of individual auctions—and compare first and second price auctions. We show that theory offers surprising endorsement for using a first price auction to sell individual impressions. In particular, first price auctions guarantee uniqueness of the steady-state equilibrium of the budget management system, monotonicity, and other desirable properties, as well as efficient computation through the solution to the well-studied Eisenberg–Gale convex program. Contrary to what one can expect from first price auctions, we show that incentives issues are not a barrier that undermines the system. Using realistic instances generated from data collected at real-world auction platforms, we show that bidders have small regret with respect to their optimal ex post strategy, and they do not have a big incentive to misreport when they can influence equilibria directly by giving inputs strategically. Finally, budget-constrained bidders, who have significant prevalence in real-world platforms, tend to have smaller regrets. Our computations indicate that bidder budgets, pacing multipliers, and regrets all have a positive association in statistical terms.
This paper was accepted by Gabriel Weintraub, revenue management and market analytics.
Funding:
D. Panigrahi was supported in part by the National Science Foundation [Awards CCF 1535972, CCF 1750140, and CCF 1955703].
Supplemental Material:
The data files are available at
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310
.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-1909</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-5501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Linthicum: INFORMS</publisher><subject>Advertising campaigns ; auction systems ; Auctions ; Bidders ; Bids ; Budgets ; Campaigns ; Digital marketing ; Equilibrium ; Impressions ; Incentives ; mechanism design ; Online advertising ; pacing equilibria ; Regret ; Uniqueness</subject><ispartof>Management science, 2022-12, Vol.68 (12), p.8515-8535</ispartof><rights>Copyright Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Dec 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-f05b0bed1fb7a004cebcdc623689e1c9b4fa9c4bc02727804f96ed9266b0df973</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-f05b0bed1fb7a004cebcdc623689e1c9b4fa9c4bc02727804f96ed9266b0df973</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6380-1516 ; 0000-0003-1899-7884 ; 0000-0002-9009-8683</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/full/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginforms$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3678,27903,27904,62593</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Conitzer, Vincent</creatorcontrib><title>Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets</title><title>Management science</title><description>Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literature do not apply directly. In this paper, we take the perspective of a budget management system that surfaces aggregated incentives—instead of individual auctions—and compare first and second price auctions. We show that theory offers surprising endorsement for using a first price auction to sell individual impressions. In particular, first price auctions guarantee uniqueness of the steady-state equilibrium of the budget management system, monotonicity, and other desirable properties, as well as efficient computation through the solution to the well-studied Eisenberg–Gale convex program. Contrary to what one can expect from first price auctions, we show that incentives issues are not a barrier that undermines the system. Using realistic instances generated from data collected at real-world auction platforms, we show that bidders have small regret with respect to their optimal ex post strategy, and they do not have a big incentive to misreport when they can influence equilibria directly by giving inputs strategically. Finally, budget-constrained bidders, who have significant prevalence in real-world platforms, tend to have smaller regrets. Our computations indicate that bidder budgets, pacing multipliers, and regrets all have a positive association in statistical terms.
This paper was accepted by Gabriel Weintraub, revenue management and market analytics.
Funding:
D. Panigrahi was supported in part by the National Science Foundation [Awards CCF 1535972, CCF 1750140, and CCF 1955703].
Supplemental Material:
The data files are available at
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310
.</description><subject>Advertising campaigns</subject><subject>auction systems</subject><subject>Auctions</subject><subject>Bidders</subject><subject>Bids</subject><subject>Budgets</subject><subject>Campaigns</subject><subject>Digital marketing</subject><subject>Equilibrium</subject><subject>Impressions</subject><subject>Incentives</subject><subject>mechanism design</subject><subject>Online advertising</subject><subject>pacing equilibria</subject><subject>Regret</subject><subject>Uniqueness</subject><issn>0025-1909</issn><issn>1526-5501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkD1PwzAYhC0EEqWwMkdiTnjtxF9jVbWAVEQHmK3YsZFL47R2MvDvSRQkRqZbnruTHoTuMRSYCP7YhmQKAoQUVYnhAi0wJSynFPAlWgAQmmMJ8hrdpHQAAC44WyC8r40Pn9nmPPij19EPbeZDtvUx9dk-emOz1WB634XstY5ftk-36MrVx2TvfnOJPrab9_Vzvnt7elmvdrkpOfS5A6pB2wY7zWuAylhtGsNIyYS02EhduVqaShsgnHABlZPMNpIwpqFxkpdL9DDvnmJ3Hmzq1aEbYhgvFeEMhKCYiZEqZsrELqVonTpF39bxW2FQkxY1aVGTFjVpGQvZXLCmCz794aJigkEp6IjkM-KD62Kb_pv8AcxebkE</recordid><startdate>20221201</startdate><enddate>20221201</enddate><creator>Conitzer, Vincent</creator><general>INFORMS</general><general>Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6380-1516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1899-7884</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9009-8683</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221201</creationdate><title>Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets</title><author>Conitzer, Vincent</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c370t-f05b0bed1fb7a004cebcdc623689e1c9b4fa9c4bc02727804f96ed9266b0df973</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Advertising campaigns</topic><topic>auction systems</topic><topic>Auctions</topic><topic>Bidders</topic><topic>Bids</topic><topic>Budgets</topic><topic>Campaigns</topic><topic>Digital marketing</topic><topic>Equilibrium</topic><topic>Impressions</topic><topic>Incentives</topic><topic>mechanism design</topic><topic>Online advertising</topic><topic>pacing equilibria</topic><topic>Regret</topic><topic>Uniqueness</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Conitzer, Vincent</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Management science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Conitzer, Vincent</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets</atitle><jtitle>Management science</jtitle><date>2022-12-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>68</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>8515</spage><epage>8535</epage><pages>8515-8535</pages><issn>0025-1909</issn><eissn>1526-5501</eissn><abstract>Mature internet advertising platforms offer high-level campaign management tools to help advertisers run their campaigns, often abstracting away the intricacies of how each ad is placed and focusing on aggregate metrics of interest to advertisers. On such platforms, advertisers often participate in auctions through a proxy bidder, so the standard incentive analyses that are common in the literature do not apply directly. In this paper, we take the perspective of a budget management system that surfaces aggregated incentives—instead of individual auctions—and compare first and second price auctions. We show that theory offers surprising endorsement for using a first price auction to sell individual impressions. In particular, first price auctions guarantee uniqueness of the steady-state equilibrium of the budget management system, monotonicity, and other desirable properties, as well as efficient computation through the solution to the well-studied Eisenberg–Gale convex program. Contrary to what one can expect from first price auctions, we show that incentives issues are not a barrier that undermines the system. Using realistic instances generated from data collected at real-world auction platforms, we show that bidders have small regret with respect to their optimal ex post strategy, and they do not have a big incentive to misreport when they can influence equilibria directly by giving inputs strategically. Finally, budget-constrained bidders, who have significant prevalence in real-world platforms, tend to have smaller regrets. Our computations indicate that bidder budgets, pacing multipliers, and regrets all have a positive association in statistical terms.
This paper was accepted by Gabriel Weintraub, revenue management and market analytics.
Funding:
D. Panigrahi was supported in part by the National Science Foundation [Awards CCF 1535972, CCF 1750140, and CCF 1955703].
Supplemental Material:
The data files are available at
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310
.</abstract><cop>Linthicum</cop><pub>INFORMS</pub><doi>10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6380-1516</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1899-7884</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9009-8683</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0025-1909 |
ispartof | Management science, 2022-12, Vol.68 (12), p.8515-8535 |
issn | 0025-1909 1526-5501 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2760885168 |
source | INFORMS PubsOnLine |
subjects | Advertising campaigns auction systems Auctions Bidders Bids Budgets Campaigns Digital marketing Equilibrium Impressions Incentives mechanism design Online advertising pacing equilibria Regret Uniqueness |
title | Pacing Equilibrium in First Price Auction Markets |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T03%3A28%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Pacing%20Equilibrium%20in%20First%20Price%20Auction%20Markets&rft.jtitle=Management%20science&rft.au=Conitzer,%20Vincent&rft.date=2022-12-01&rft.volume=68&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=8515&rft.epage=8535&rft.pages=8515-8535&rft.issn=0025-1909&rft.eissn=1526-5501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4310&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2760885168%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2760885168&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |