Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Platform Competition in the Autobidding World

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 2405.02699 v1 pith:EH3VB2DY submitted 2024-05-04 cs.GT

Platform Competition in the Autobidding World

classification cs.GT
keywords advertiserplatformauctionplatformscompetitionacrossadvertisersauctions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We study the problem of auction design for advertising platforms that face strategic advertisers who are bidding across platforms. Each advertiser's goal is to maximize their total value or conversions while satisfying some constraint(s) across all the platforms they participates in. In this paper, we focus on advertisers with return-over-investment (henceforth, ROI) constraints, i.e. each advertiser is trying to maximize value while making sure that their ROI across all platforms is no less than some target value. An advertiser interacts with the platforms through autobidders -- for each platform, the advertiser strategically chooses a target ROI to report to the platform's autobidder, which in turn uses a uniform bid multiplier to bid on the advertiser's behalf on the queries owned by the given platform. Our main result is that for a platform trying to maximize revenue, competition with other platforms is a key factor to consider when designing their auction. While first-price auctions are optimal (for both revenue and welfare) in the absence of competition, this no longer holds true in multi-platform settings. We show that there exists a large class of advertiser valuations over queries such that, from the platform's perspective, running a second price auction dominates running a first price auction. Furthermore, our analysis reveals the key factors influencing platform choice of auction format: (i) intensity of competition among advertisers, (ii) sensitivity of bid landscapes to an auction change (driven by advertiser sensitivity to price changes), and (iii) relative inefficiency of second-price auctions compared to first-price auctions.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Beyond the PPAD hardness of Auto-bidding Auctions

    cs.GT 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    Under non-atomic value distributions, auto-bidding equilibria become separately monotone generalized Nash equilibria and PRIME solves them with last-iterate linear convergence.

  2. HOB: A Holistically Optimized Bidding Strategy under Heterogeneous Bidding Environments

    cs.GT 2025-10 conditional novelty 4.0

    HOB equalizes marginal cost across heterogeneous auction channels and uses a zero-inflated exponential win-price model for first-price auctions with organic traffic, reporting a 3.0% GMV lift in online A/B tests.