We present a deterministic exploration mechanism for sponsored search auctions, which enables the auctioneer to learn the relevance scores of advertisers, and allows advertisers to estimate the true value of clicks generated at the auction site. This exploratory mechanism deviates only minimally from the mechanism being currently used by Google and Yahoo! in the sense that it retains the same pricing rule, similar ranking scheme, as well as, similar mathematical structure of payoffs. In particular, the estimations of the relevance scores and true-values are achieved by providing a chance to lower ranked advertisers to obtain better slots. This allows the search engine to potentially test a new pool of advertisers, and correspondingly, enables new advertisers to estimate the value of clicks leads generated via the auction. Both these quantities are unknown a priori, and their knowledge is necessary for the auction to operate efficiently. We show that such an exploration policy can be incorporated without any significant loss in revenue for the auctioneer. We compare the revenue of the new mechanism to that of the standard mechanism at their corresponding symmetric Nash equilibria and compute the cost of uncertainty, which is defined as the relative loss in expected revenue per impression. We also bound the loss in efficiency, as well as, in user experience due to exploration, under the same solution concept (i.e. SNE). Thus the proposed exploration mechanism learns the relevance scores while incorporating the incentive constraints from the advertisers who are selfish and are trying to maximize their own profits, and therefore, the exploration is essentially achieved via mechanism design. We also discuss variations of the new mechanism such as truthful implementations.
Moreover, as we discuss later in , the problem of designing a family of optimal exploratory mechanisms, which for example would provide the most information while minimizing expected loss in revenue is far from being solved. The work in @cite_3 and in this paper provide just two instances of mechanism design which do provably well, but more work that analyze different aspects of exploratory mechanisms are necessary in this emerging field. Thus, to the best of our knowledge, we are one of the first groups to formally study the problem of estimating relevance and valuations from incentive as well as learning theory perspective without deviating much from the current settings of the mechanism currently in place.
@cite_3
2021734699 2130359158 1987352480 1797933865
We consider the problem of designing a revenue-maximizing auction for a single item, when the values of the bidders are drawn from a correlated distribution. We observe that there exists an algorithm that finds the optimal randomized mechanism that runs in time polynomial in the size of the support. We leverage this result to show that in the oracle model introduced by Ronen and Saberi [FOCS'02], there exists a polynomial time truthful in expectation mechanism that provides a (1.5+e)-approximation to the revenue achievable by an optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanism, and a polynomial time deterministic truthful mechanism that guarantees 5 3 approximation to the revenue achievable by an optimal deterministic truthful mechanism. We show that the 5 3-approximation mechanism provides the same approximation ratio also with respect to the optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanism. This shows that the performance gap between truthful-in-expectation and deterministic mechanisms is relatively small. En route, we solve an open question of Mehta and Vazirani [EC'04]. Finally, we extend some of our results to the multi-item case, and show how to compute the optimal truthful-in-expectation mechanisms for bidders with more complex valuations. We study mechanism design in dynamic quasilinear environments where private information arrives over time and decisions are made over multiple periods. We make three contributions. First, we provide a necessary condition for incentive compatibility that takes the form of an envelope formula for the derivative of an agent's equilibrium expected payoff with respect to his current type. It combines the familiar marginal effect of types on payoffs with novel marginal effects of the current type on future ones that are captured by “impulse response functions.” The formula yields an expression for dynamic virtual surplus that is instrumental to the design of optimal mechanisms and to the study of distortions under such mechanisms. Second, we characterize the transfers that satisfy the envelope formula and establish a sense in which they are pinned down by the allocation rule (“revenue equivalence”). Third, we characterize perfect Bayesian equilibrium‐implementable allocation rules in Markov environments, which yields tractable sufficient conditions that facilitate novel applications. We illustrate the results by applying them to the design of optimal mechanisms for the sale of experience goods (“bandit auctions”). In this paper we consider a mechanism design problem in the context of large-scale crowdsourcing markets such as Amazon's Mechanical Turk mturk, ClickWorker clickworker, CrowdFlower crowdflower. In these markets, there is a requester who wants to hire workers to accomplish some tasks. Each worker is assumed to give some utility to the requester on getting hired. Moreover each worker has a minimum cost that he wants to get paid for getting hired. This minimum cost is assumed to be private information of the workers. The question then is -- if the requester has a limited budget, how to design a direct revelation mechanism that picks the right set of workers to hire in order to maximize the requester's utility? We note that although the previous work (Singer (2010) (2011)) has studied this problem, a crucial difference in which we deviate from earlier work is the notion of large-scale markets that we introduce in our model. Without the large market assumption, it is known that no mechanism can achieve a competitive ratio better than 0.414 and 0.5 for deterministic and randomized mechanisms respectively (while the best known deterministic and randomized mechanisms achieve an approximation ratio of 0.292 and 0.33 respectively). In this paper, we design a budget-feasible mechanism for large markets that achieves a competitive ratio of 1 -- 1 e = 0.63. Our mechanism can be seen as a generalization of an alternate way to look at the proportional share mechanism, which is used in all the previous works so far on this problem. Interestingly, we can also show that our mechanism is optimal by showing that no truthful mechanism can achieve a factor better than 1 -- 1 e, thus, fully resolving this setting. Finally we consider the more general case of submodular utility functions and give new and improved mechanisms for the case when the market is large. We introduce a dynamic mechanism design problem in which the designer wants to offer for sale an item to an agent, and another item to the same agent at some point in the future. The agent's joint distribution of valuations for the two items is known, and the agent knows the valuation for the current item (but not for the one in the future). The designer seeks to maximize expected revenue, and the auction must be deterministic, truthful, and ex post individually rational. The optimum mechanism involves a protocol whereby the seller elicits the buyer's current valuation, and based on the bid makes two take-it-or-leave-it offers, one for now and one for the future. We show that finding the optimum deterministic mechanism in this situation --- arguably the simplest meaningful dynamic mechanism design problem imaginable --- is NP-hard. We also prove several positive results, among them a polynomial linear programming-based algorithm for the optimum randomized auction (even for many bidders and periods), and we show strong separations in revenue between non-adaptive, adaptive, and randomized auctions, even when the valuations in the two periods are uncorrelated. Finally, for the same problem in an environment in which contracts cannot be enforced, and thus perfection of equilibrium is necessary, we show that the optimum randomized mechanism requires multiple rounds of cheap talk-like interactions.