Optimal Type-Dependent Liquid Welfare Guarantees for Autobidding Agents with Budgets
Riccardo Colini-Baldeschi, Sophie Klumper, Twan Kroll, Stefano Leonardi, Guido Schäfer, Artem Tsikiridis
Abstract
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.
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 b52c62d7-ea99-445f-ab1a-4566c3dba4efCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on10
- Towards Efficient Auctions in an Auto-bidding WorldYuan Deng, Jieming Mao, Vahab S. Mirrokni, Song ZuoWWW 2021 · 87 citations
- Auction Design for ROI-Constrained BuyersNegin Golrezaei, Ilan Lobel, Renato Paes LemeWWW 2021 · 55 citations
- Online Learning with Knapsacks: the Best of Both WorldsMatteo Castiglioni, Andrea Celli, Christian KroerICML 2022 · 47 citations
- Auctions between Regret-Minimizing AgentsYoav Kolumbus, Noam NisanWWW 2022 · 47 citations
- Auction Design in an Auto-bidding Setting: Randomization Improves Efficiency Beyond VCGAranyak MehtaWWW 2022 · 41 citations
Related papers
- Efficiency of Non-Truthful Auctions in Auto-bidding with Budget ConstraintsChristopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta, Wennan ZhuWWW 2024 · 10 citations
- Simultaneous 2nd Price Item Auctions with No-UnderbiddingMichal Feldman, Galia ShabtaiAAAI 2021 · 2 citations
- Efficiency of Non-Truthful Auctions in Auto-bidding: The Power of RandomizationChristopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta, Andrés PerlrothWWW 2023 · 14 citations
- No-Regret Algorithms in non-Truthful Auctions with Budget and ROI ConstraintsGagan Aggarwal, Giannis Fikioris, Mingfei ZhaoWWW 2025 · 13 citations
- Strategic Budget Selection in a Competitive Autobidding WorldYiding Feng, Brendan Lucier, Aleksandrs SlivkinsSTOC 2024 · 2 citations
