Econometrics for Learning Agents

The main goal of this paper is to develop a theory of inference of player valuations from observed data in the generalized second price auction without relying on the Nash equilibrium assumption. Existing work in Economics on inferring agent values from data relies on the assumption that all participant strategies are best responses of the observed play of other players, i.e. they constitute a Nash equilibrium. In this paper, we show how to perform inference relying on a weaker assumption instead: assuming that players are using some form of no-regret learning. Learning outcomes emerged in recent years as an attractive alternative to Nash equilibrium in analyzing game outcomes, modeling players who haven't reached a stable equilibrium, but rather use algorithmic learning, aiming to learn the best way to play from previous observations. In this paper we show how to infer values of players who use algorithmic learning strategies. Such inference is an important first step before we move to testing any learning theoretic behavioral model on auction data. We apply our techniques to a dataset from Microsoft's sponsored search ad auction system

Q&A Platforms Evaluated Using Butler University Q&A Intelligence Index

A new study using the Butler University Q&A Intelligence Index measures how various mobile Q&A platforms deliver quality, accurate answers in a timely manner to a broad variety of questions. Based on the results of our analysis, ChaCha led all Q&A platforms on mobile devices. Results of the study are based upon review of a large set of responses from each of the major Q&A platforms, coupled with a comparison of disparate Q&A platforms that serve answers in different ways. Our methodology included the creation of a new metric, termed the Butler University Q&A Intelligence Index, which measures the likelihood that a user can expect to receive a correct answer in a timely manner to any random question asked using natural language. We asked questions via mobile services and randomized the questions to cover both popular and long-tail knowledge requests

Simulating the conflict between reputation and profitability for online rating portals

We simulate the process of possible interactions between a set of competitive services and a set of portals that provide online rating for these services. We argue that to have a profitable business, these portals are forced to have subscribed services that are rated by the portals. To satisfy the subscribing services, we make the assumption that the portals improve the rating of a given service by one unit per transaction that involves payment. In this study we follow the 'what-if' methodology, analysing strategies that a service may choose from to select the best portal for it to subscribe to, and strategies for a portal to accept the subscription such that its reputation loss, in terms of the integrity of its ratings, is minimised. We observe that the behaviour of the simulated agents in accordance to our model is quite natural from the real-would perspective. One conclusion from the simulations is that under reasonable conditions, if most of the services and rating portals in a given industry do not accept a subscription policy similar to the one indicated above, they will lose, respectively, their ratings and reputations, and, moreover the rating portals will have problems in making a profit. Our prediction is that the modern portal-rating based economy sector will eventually evolve into a subscription process similar to the one we suggest in this study, as an alternative to a business model based purely on advertising