Computational Arbitrage in AI Model Markets
Ricardo Dominguez-Olmedo, Bernhard Schölkopf, Moritz Hardt
Abstract
Consider a market of competing model providers selling query access to models with varying costs and capabilities. Customers submit problem instances and are willing to pay up to a budget for a verifiable solution. An arbitrageur efficiently allocates inference budget across providers to undercut the market, thus creating a competitive offering with no model-development risk. In this work, we initiate the study of arbitrage in AI model markets, empirically demonstrating the viability of arbitrage and illustrating its economic consequences. We conduct an in-depth case study of SWE-bench GitHub issue resolution using two representative models, GPT-5 mini and DeepSeek v3.2. In this verifiable domain, simple arbitrage strategies generate net profit margins of up to 40%. Robust arbitrage strategies that generalize across different domains remain profitable. Distillation further creates strong arbitrage opportunities, potentially at the expense of the teacher model's revenue. Multiple competing arbitrageurs drive down consumer prices, reducing the marginal revenue of model providers. At the same time, arbitrage reduces market segmentation and facilitates market entry for smaller model providers by enabling earlier revenue capture. Our results suggest that arbitrage can be a powerful force in AI model markets with implications for model development, distillation, and deployment 1 .
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 0f09645f-5689-4b4c-a8fc-e6920548693eBuilds on18
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
- SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-world Github Issues?Carlos E. Jimenez, John Yang, Alexander Wettig, Shunyu Yao et al.ICLR 2024 · 2,082 citations
- SWE-agent: Agent-Computer Interfaces Enable Automated Software EngineeringJohn Yang, Carlos E. Jimenez, Alexander Wettig, Kilian Lieret et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 2,059 citations
- Does Reinforcement Learning Really Incentivize Reasoning Capacity in LLMs Beyond the Base Model?Zhiqi Chen, Rui Lu, Andrew Zhao, Zhaokai Wang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 1,109 citations
- miniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicsKunhao Zheng, Jesse Michael Han, Stanislas PoluICLR 2022 · 342 citations
Related papers
- Market-Bench: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Economic and Trade CompetitionYushuo Zheng, Huiyu Duan, Zicheng Zhang, Yucheng Zhu et al.ACL 2026 · 1 citation
- Fine-Tuning Games: Bargaining and Adaptation for General-Purpose ModelsBenjamin Laufer, Jon M. Kleinberg, Hoda HeidariWWW 2024 · 27 citations
- Multilingual Arbitration: Optimizing Data Pools to Accelerate Multilingual ProgressAyomide Odumakinde, Daniel D'souza, Pat Verga, Beyza Ermis et al.ACL 2025 · 3 citations
- Pricing and Competition for Generative AIRafid MahmoodNeurIPS 2024 · 18 citations
- SWE-Lancer: Can Frontier LLMs Earn $1 Million from Real-World Freelance Software Engineering?Samuel Miserendino, Michele Wang, Tejal Patwardhan, Johannes HeideckeICML 2025
