Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Algorithmic Collusion in Dynamic Pricing with Deep Reinforcement Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.02437 v1 pith:2Y2KAOO7 submitted 2024-06-04 econ.GN q-fin.EC

classification econ.GNq-fin.EC
keywords algorithmscollusionpricinglearningreinforcementusedalgorithmalgorithmic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Nowadays, a significant share of the Business-to-Consumer sector is based on online platforms like Amazon and Alibaba and uses Artificial Intelligence for pricing strategies. This has sparked debate on whether pricing algorithms may tacitly collude to set supra-competitive prices without being explicitly designed to do so. Our study addresses these concerns by examining the risk of collusion when Reinforcement Learning algorithms are used to decide on pricing strategies in competitive markets. Prior research in this field focused on Tabular Q-learning (TQL) and led to opposing views on whether learning-based algorithms can lead to supra-competitive prices. Our work contributes to this ongoing discussion by providing a more nuanced numerical study that goes beyond TQL by additionally capturing off- and on-policy Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithms. We study multiple Bertrand oligopoly variants and show that algorithmic collusion depends on the algorithm used. In our experiments, TQL exhibits higher collusion and price dispersion phenomena compared to DRL algorithms. We show that the severity of collusion depends not only on the algorithm used but also on the characteristics of the market environment. We further find that Proximal Policy Optimization appears to be less sensitive to collusive outcomes compared to other state-of-the-art DRL algorithms.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools