Online advertising systems have recently transitioned to autobidding, allowing advertisers to delegate bidding decisions to automated agents. Each advertiser directs their agent to optimize an objective function subject to return-on-investment (ROI) and budget constraints. Given their practical relevance, this shift has spurred a surge of research on the liquid welfare price of anarchy (POA) of fundamental auction formats under autobidding, most notably simultaneous first-price auctions (FPA). One of the main challenges is to understand the efficiency of FPA in the presence of heterogeneous agent types. We introduce a type-dependent smoothness framework that enables a unified analysis of the POA in such complex autobidding environments. In our approach, we derive type-dependent smoothness parameters which we carefully balance to obtain POA bounds. This balancing gives rise to a POA-revealing mathematical program, which we use to determine tight bounds on the POA of coarse correlated equilibria (CCE). Our framework is versatile enough to handle heterogeneous agent types and extends to the general class of fractionally subadditive valuations. Additionally, we develop a novel reduction technique that transforms budget-constrained agents into budget-unconstrained ones. Combining this reduction technique with our smoothness framework enables us to derive tight bounds on the POA of CCE in the general hybrid agent model with both ROI and budget constraints. Among other results, our bounds uncover an intriguing threshold phenomenon showing that the POA depends intricately on the smallest and largest agent types. We also extend our study to FPAs with reserve prices, which can be interpreted as predictions of agents’ values, to further improve efficiency guarantees.

In the random-order model for online learning, the sequence of losses is chosen upfront by an adversary and presented to the learner after a random permutation. Any random-order input is *asymptotically* equivalent to a stochastic i.i.d.~one, but, for finite times, it may exhibit significant *non-stationarity*, which can hinder the performance of stochastic learning algorithms. While algorithms for adversarial inputs naturally maintain their regret guarantees in random order, simple no-regret algorithms exist for the stochastic model that fail against random-order instances. In this paper, we propose a general procedure to adapt stochastic learning algorithms to the random-order model without substantially affecting their regret guarantees. This allows us to recover improved regret bounds for prediction with delays, bandits with switching costs, and online learning with constraints. Finally, we investigate online classification and prove that, in random order, learnability is characterized by the VC dimension rather than by the Littlestone dimension, thus providing a further separation from the general adversarial model.

In online learning, a decision maker repeatedly selects one of a set of actions, with the goal of minimizing the overall loss incurred. Following the recent line of research on algorithms endowed with additional predictive features, we revisit this problem by allowing the decision maker to acquire additional information on the actions to be selected. In particular, we study the power of \emph{best-action queries}, which reveal beforehand the identity of the best action at a given time step. In practice, predictive features may be expensive, so we allow the decision maker to issue at most $k$ such queries. We establish tight bounds on the performance any algorithm can achieve when given access to $k$ best-action queries for different types of feedback models. In particular, we prove that in the full feedback model, $k$ queries are enough to achieve an optimal regret of $\Theta(\min\{\sqrt T, \frac{T}{k}\})$. This finding highlights the significant multiplicative advantage in the regret rate achievable with even a modest (sublinear) number $k \in \Omega(\sqrt{T})$ of queries. Additionally, we study the challenging setting in which the only available feedback is obtained during the time steps corresponding to the $k$ best-action queries. There, we provide a tight regret rate of $\Theta(\min\{\frac{T}{\sqrt k},\frac{T^2}{k^2}\})$, which improves over the standard $\Theta(\frac{T}{\sqrt k})$ regret rate for label efficient prediction for $k \in \Omega(T^{2/3})$.

The realm of algorithms with predictions has led to the development of several new algorithms that leverage predictions to enhance their performance guarantees. The challenge is to devise algorithms that achieve optimal approximation guarantees as the prediction quality varies from perfect (consistency) to imperfect (robustness). This framework is particularly appealing in mechanism design contexts, where predictions might convey private information about the agents. In this paper, we design strategyproof mechanisms that leverage predictions to achieve improved approximation guarantees for several variants of the Generalized Assignment Problem (GAP) in the private graph model. In this model, first introduced by Dughmi & Ghosh (2010), the set of resources that an agent is compatible with is private information. For the Bipartite Matching Problem (BMP), we give a deterministic group-strategyproof (GSP) mechanism that is (1 + 1/γ)-consistent and (1 + γ)-robust, where γ ≥ 1 is some confidence parameter. We also prove that this is best possible. Remarkably, our mechanism draws inspiration from the renowned Gale-Shapley algorithm, incorporating predictions as a crucial element. Additionally, we give a randomized mechanism that is universally GSP and improves on the guarantees in expectation. The other GAP variants that we consider all make use of a unified greedy mechanism that adds edges to the assignment according to a specific order. For a special case of Restricted Multiple Knapsack, this results in a deterministic strategyproof mechanism that is (1 + 1/γ)-consistent and (2 + γ)-robust. We then focus on two variants: Agent Size GAP (where each agent has one size) and Value Consensus GAP (where all agents have the same preference order over resources). For both variants, our universally GSP mechanisms randomize over the greedy mechanism, our mechanism for BMP and the predicted assignment, leading to (1 + 3/γ)-consistency and (3 + γ)-robustness in expectation. All our mechanisms also provide more fine-grained approximation guarantees that interpolate between the consistency and robustness guarantees, depending on some natural error measure of the prediction.

We study fully dynamic online selection problems in an adversarial/stochastic setting that includes Bayesian online selection, prophet inequalities, posted price mechanisms, and stochastic probing problems subject to combinatorial constraints. In the classical ``incremental'' version of the problem, selected elements remain active until the end of the input sequence. On the other hand, in the fully dynamic version of the problem, elements stay active for a limited time interval, and then leave. This models, for example, the online matching of tasks to workers with task/worker-dependent working times, and sequential posted pricing of perishable goods. A successful approach to online selection problems in the adversarial setting is given by the notion of Online Contention Resolution Scheme (OCRS), that uses a priori information to formulate a linear relaxation of the underlying optimization problem, whose optimal fractional solution is rounded online for any adversarial order of the input sequence. Our main contribution is providing a general method for constructing an OCRS for fully dynamic online selection problems. Then, we show how to employ such OCRS to construct no-regret algorithms in a partial information model with semi-bandit feedback and adversarial inputs.

In this work we introduce a new class of mechanisms composed of a traditional Generalized Second Price (GSP) auction, and a fair division scheme in order to achieve some desired level of fairness between groups of Bayesian strategic advertisers. We propose two mechanisms, beta-Fair GSP and GSP-EFX, that compose GSP with, respectively, an envy-free up to one item, and an envy-free up to any item fair division scheme. The payments of GSP are adjusted in order to compensate advertisers that suffer a loss of efficiency due the fair division stage. We investigate the strategic learning implications of the deployment of sponsored search auction mechanisms that obey to such fairness criteria. We prove that, for both mechanisms, if bidders play so as to minimize their external regret they are guaranteed to reach an equilibrium with good social welfare. We also prove that the mechanisms are budget balanced, so that the payments charged by the traditional GSP mechanism are a good proxy of the total compensation offered to the advertisers. Finally, we evaluate the quality of the allocations through experiments on real-world data.

Budget-management systems are one of the key components of modern auction markets. Internet advertising platforms typically offer advertisers the possibility to pace the rate at which their budget is depleted, through budget-pacing mechanisms. We focus on multiplicative pacing mechanisms in an online setting in which a bidder is repeatedly confronted with a series of advertising opportunities. After collecting bids, each item is then allocated through a single-item, second-price auction. If there were no budgetary constraints, bidding truthfully would be an optimal choice for the advertiser. However, since their budget is limited, the advertiser may want to shade their bid downwards in order to preserve their budget for future opportunities, and to spread expenditures evenly over time. The literature on online pacing problems mostly focuses on the setting in which the bidder optimizes an additive separable objective, such as the total click-through rate or the revenue of the allocation. In many settings, however, bidders may also care about other objectives which oftentimes are non-separable. We study the frequent case in which the utility of a (proxy) bidder depends on the rewards obtained from items they are allocated, and on the distance of the realized distribution of impressions from a target distribution. We introduce a novel regularizer which can describe those distributional preferences, while keeping the problem tractable. We show that this regularizer can be integrated into an existing online mirror descent scheme with minor modifications, attaining the optimal order of sub-linear regret compared to the optimal allocation in hindsight when inputs are drawn independently, from an unknown distribution. Moreover, we show that our approach can easily be incorporated in standard existing pacing systems that are not usually built for this objective. The effectiveness of our algorithm in internet advertising applications is confirmed by numerical experiments on real-world data.

This paper studies equilibrium quality of semi-separable position auctions (known as the Ad Types setting [9]) with greedy or optimal allocation combined with generalized second-price (GSP) or Vickrey-Clarke-Groves (VCG) pricing. We make three contributions: first, we give upper and lower bounds on the Price of Anarchy (PoA) for auctions which use greedy allocation with GSP pricing, greedy allocation with VCG pricing, and optimal allocation with GSP pricing. Second, we give Bayes-Nash equilibrium characterizations for two-player, two-slot instances (for all auction formats) and show that there exists both a revenue hierarchy and revenue equivalence across some formats. Finally, we use no-regret learning algorithms and bidding data from a large online advertising platform to evaluate the performance of the mechanisms under semi-realistic conditions. We find that the VCG mechanism tends to obtain revenue and welfare comparable to or better than that of the other mechanisms. We also find that in practice, each of the mechanisms obtains significantly better welfare than our worst-case bounds might suggest.

We study the problem of an online advertising system that wants to optimally spend an advertiser’s given budget for a campaign across multiple platforms, without knowing the value for showing an ad to the users on those platforms. We model this challenging practical application as a Stochastic Bandits with Knapsacks problem over T rounds of bidding with the set of arms given by the set of distinct bidding m-tuples, where m is the number of platforms. We modify the algorithm proposed in Badanidiyuru et al., [11] to extend it to the case of multiple platforms to obtain an algorithm for both the discrete and continuous bid-spaces. Namely, for discrete bid spaces we give an algorithm with regret , where OPT is the performance of the optimal algorithm that knows the distributions. For continuous bid spaces the regret of our algorithm is . When restricted to this special-case, this bound improves over Sankararaman and Slivkins [34] in the regime OPT < < T, as is the case in the particular application at hand. Second, we show an lower bound for the discrete case and an Ω(m1/3B2/3) lower bound for the continuous setting, almost matching the upper bounds. Finally, we use a real-world data set from a large internet online advertising company with multiple ad platforms and show that our algorithms outperform common benchmarks and satisfy the required properties warranted in the real-world application.

Incentive compatibility (IC) is a desirable property for any auction mechanism, including those used in online advertising. However, in real world applications practical constraints and complex environments often result in mechanisms that lack incentive compatibility. Recently, several papers investigated the problem of deploying black-box statistical tests to determine if an auction mechanism is incentive compatible by using the notion of IC-Regret that measures the regret of a truthful bidder. Unfortunately, most of those methods are computationally intensive, since they require the execution of many counterfactual experiments.

Wardrop equilibria in nonatomic congestion games are in general inefficient as they do not induce an optimal flow that minimizes the total travel time. Network tolls are a prominent and popular way to induce an optimum flow in equilibrium. The classical approach to find such tolls is marginal cost pricing which requires the exact knowledge of the demand on the network. In this paper, we investigate under which conditions demand-independent optimum tolls exist that induce the system optimum flow for any travel demand in the network. We give several characterizations for the existence of such tolls both in terms of the cost structure and the network structure of the game. Specifically we show that demand-independent optimum tolls exist if and only if the edge cost functions are shifted monomials as used by the Bureau of Public Roads. Moreover, non-negative demand-independent optimum tolls exist when the network is a directed acyclic multi-graph. Finally, we show that any network with a single origin-destination pair admits demand-independent optimum tolls that, although not necessarily non-negative, satisfy a budget constraint.

We develop and extend a line of recent work on the design of mechanisms for two-sided markets. The markets we consider consist of buyers and sellers of a number of items, and the aim of a mechanism is to improve the social welfare by arranging purchases and sales of the items. A mechanism is given prior distributions on the agents' valuations of the items, but not the actual valuations; thus the aim is to maximise the expected social welfare over these distributions. As in previous work, we are interested in the worst-case ratio between the social welfare achieved by a truthful mechanism, and the best social welfare possible.

Mechanism design for one-sided markets is an area of extensive research in economics and, since more than a decade, in computer science as well. Two-sided markets, on the other hand, have not received the same attention despite the numerous applications to web advertisement, stock exchange, and frequency spectrum allocation. This work studies double auctions, in which unit-demand buyers and unit-supply sellers act strategically. An ideal goal in double auction design is to maximize the social welfare of buyers and sellers with individually rational (IR), incentive compatible (IC) and strongly budget-balanced (SBB) mechanisms. The first two properties are standard. SBB requires that the payments charged to the buyers are entirely handed to the sellers. This property is crucial in all the contexts that do not allow the auctioneer retaining a share of buyers' payments or subsidizing the market. Unfortunately, this goal is known to be unachievable even for the special case of bilateral trade, where there is only one buyer and one seller. Therefore, in subsequent papers, meaningful trade-offs between these requirements have been investigated. Our main contribution is the first IR, IC and SBB mechanism that provides an O(1)-approximation to the optimal social welfare. This result holds for any number of buyers and sellers with arbitrary, independent distributions. Moreover, our result continues to hold when there is an additional matroid constraint on the sets of buyers who may get allocated an item. To prove our main result, we devise an extension of sequential posted price mechanisms to two-sided markets. In addition to this, we improve the best-known approximation bounds for the bilateral trade problem.

Sponsored search auctions are used to allocate ad slots to advertisers. The standard mechanism for sponsored search auctions is the Generalized-Second-Price (GSP) auction.