Algorithmic collusion: A critical review

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.04740v1
• Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 09:14:16 GMT
• Title: Algorithmic collusion: A critical review
• Authors: Florian E. Dorner
• Abstract summary: We review the literature on algorithmic collusion and connect it to results from computer science. We find that while it is likely too early to adapt antitrust law to deal with self-learning algorithms colluding in real markets, other forms of algorithmic collusion might already warrant legislative action.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The prospect of collusive agreements being stabilized via the use of pricing algorithms is widely discussed by antitrust experts and economists. However, the literature is often lacking the perspective of computer scientists, and seems to regularly overestimate the applicability of recent progress in machine learning to the complex coordination problem firms face in forming cartels. Similarly, modelling results supporting the possibility of collusion by learning algorithms often use simple market simulations which allows them to use simple algorithms that do not produce many of the problems machine learning practitioners have to deal with in real-world problems, which could prove to be particularly detrimental to learning collusive agreements. After critically reviewing the literature on algorithmic collusion, and connecting it to results from computer science, we find that while it is likely too early to adapt antitrust law to be able to deal with self-learning algorithms colluding in real markets, other forms of algorithmic collusion, such as hub-and-spoke arrangements facilitated by centralized pricing algorithms might already warrant legislative action.

Related papers

• Contractual Reinforcement Learning: Pulling Arms with Invisible Hands [68.77645200579181]
  We propose a theoretical framework for aligning economic interests of different stakeholders in the online learning problems through contract design. For the planning problem, we design an efficient dynamic programming algorithm to determine the optimal contracts against the far-sighted agent. For the learning problem, we introduce a generic design of no-regret learning algorithms to untangle the challenges from robust design of contracts to the balance of exploration and exploitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-01T16:53:00Z)
• A Simple Learning-Augmented Algorithm for Online Packing with Concave Objectives [4.9826534303287335]
  We introduce and analyze a simple learning-augmented algorithm for online packing problems with linear constraints and concave objectives. We further raise the problem of understanding necessary and sufficient conditions for when such simple black-box solutions may be optimal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T18:39:28Z)
• Detecting and Triaging Spoofing using Temporal Convolutional Networks [6.24302896438145]
  algorithmic trading and electronic markets continue to transform the landscape of financial markets. We propose a framework that can be adapted easily to various problems in the space of detecting market manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T09:17:12Z)
• Mathematical Algorithm Design for Deep Learning under Societal and Judicial Constraints: The Algorithmic Transparency Requirement [65.26723285209853]
  We derive a framework to analyze whether a transparent implementation in a computing model is feasible. Based on previous results, we find that Blum-Shub-Smale Machines have the potential to establish trustworthy solvers for inverse problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-18T15:32:38Z)
• Measuring, Interpreting, and Improving Fairness of Algorithms using Causal Inference and Randomized Experiments [8.62694928567939]
  We present an algorithm-agnostic framework (MIIF) to Measure, Interpret, and Improve the Fairness of an algorithmic decision. We measure the algorithm bias using randomized experiments, which enables the simultaneous measurement of disparate treatment, disparate impact, and economic value. We also develop an explainable machine learning model which accurately interprets and distills the beliefs of a blackbox algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T19:45:18Z)
• Minimalistic Predictions to Schedule Jobs with Online Precedence Constraints [117.8317521974783]
  We consider non-clairvoyant scheduling with online precedence constraints. An algorithm is oblivious to any job dependencies and learns about a job only if all of its predecessors have been completed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-30T13:17:15Z)
• Language Model Decoding as Likelihood-Utility Alignment [54.70547032876017]
  We introduce a taxonomy that groups decoding strategies based on their implicit assumptions about how well the model's likelihood is aligned with the task-specific notion of utility. Specifically, by analyzing the correlation between the likelihood and the utility of predictions across a diverse set of tasks, we provide the first empirical evidence supporting the proposed taxonomy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-13T17:55:51Z)
• Artificial Intelligence and Spontaneous Collusion [0.0]
  We develop a tractable model for studying strategic interactions between learning algorithms. We uncover a mechanism responsible for the emergence of algorithmic collusion. We show that spontaneous coupling can sustain collusion in prices and market shares.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-12T00:50:15Z)
• Optimal Robustness-Consistency Trade-offs for Learning-Augmented Online Algorithms [85.97516436641533]
  We study the problem of improving the performance of online algorithms by incorporating machine-learned predictions. The goal is to design algorithms that are both consistent and robust. We provide the first set of non-trivial lower bounds for competitive analysis using machine-learned predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-22T04:51:01Z)
• Probably Approximately Correct Constrained Learning [135.48447120228658]
  We develop a generalization theory based on the probably approximately correct (PAC) learning framework. We show that imposing a learner does not make a learning problem harder in the sense that any PAC learnable class is also a constrained learner. We analyze the properties of this solution and use it to illustrate how constrained learning can address problems in fair and robust classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-09T19:59:29Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.