SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2605.06711

Pricing, Matching, and Bundling: an Equilibrium Analysis of Online Platforms

Abstract

Modern online platforms such as marketplaces, ride-hailing services, and food-delivery systems serve a dual role: they are both markets where participants interact and transact, and operators that design and govern how these markets function. These platforms connect multiple sides, for example buyers, sellers, and couriers, facilitating access that would otherwise be difficult to achieve. By setting the rules of the market, platforms determine who participates, how interactions take place, and how value is created and distributed. In response to these rules, participants may behave strategically, deciding whether to join the platform and which transactions to pursue. This thesis studies how platform design affects market outcomes through three key levers: pricing that determines participants' gains when operating on a platform; matching that governs which interactions are feasible among participants; and bundling that shapes the structure of supply when the platform itself acts as a market participant. Across these levers, the goal in this thesis is to understand how platforms can be designed to balance platform profitability with overall market welfare. The first part of this thesis studies pricing, including both the commission fees that participants pay to a platform and the prices associated with each transaction. The second part of this thesis studies matching. By shaping recommendation systems and consumer search, platforms influence which transactions take place. The third part of this thesis analyzes bundling. As a marketplace operator, a platform may be able to source products from sellers and offer them as bundled packages to buyers. Collectively, this thesis shows how pricing, matching, and bundling serve as complementary design levers through which platforms can shape market outcomes.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gary Qiurui Ma. 2026-05-06. Pricing, Matching, and Bundling: an Equilibrium Analysis of Online Platforms. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06711

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

MMS Allocation for Chores with Online Agent Arrivals

We study the fair allocation of $m$ indivisible chores to $n$ agents with subadditive cost functions arriving online in an arbitrary order. Upon an agent's arrival, we are informed of her cost function and must irrevocably assign her a set of chores. We focus on the Maximin Share (MMS) fairness notion and aim to compute an allocation in which all items are assigned, and no agent incurs a cost more than $\alpha$ times her MMS. Without any prior information about the instance (other than $n$ and $m$), we design an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{n, k\log^{1+\epsilon}k, \log m\})$ for any constant $\epsilon > 0$, where $k$ denotes the number of cost function types. Our bound matches the best known offline approximation guarantees for MMS under subadditive costs and is nearly optimal with respect to all three parameters: we show that even for binary additive cost functions, no online algorithm can achieve a competitive ratio of $o(\min\{n, k\log k, \log m\})$. We then consider the setting in which the $k$ cost function types are known in advance (though the realized types of arriving agents are not). For additive cost functions, we provide an algorithm with a competitive ratio of $O(\min\{\log k, \log(kn)/\log\log(kn)\})$, and show that constant-competitive algorithms do not exist for general $k$, even for the binary additive setting. For binary additive functions when $k \le n$, we propose a $3$-competitive algorithm and establish a lower bound of $2$.

cs.GT

Truncated Noisy Best-Response Algorithms: Toward Game Theoretic Learning with Safety Guarantees

We consider a game theoretic approach to solve multi-agent coordination problems with submodular maximization objectives. It is known for such problems that the Nash equilibria for the corresponding game are always within 50% of the optimal, but that the equilibria which achieve this worst-case bound are not stable. To exploit this instability, we propose a family of algorithms which we call Truncated Noisy Best-Response (TNBR) Algorithms. These algorithms are flexibly characterized by agents asynchronously and stochastically selecting actions from a neighbourhood of their best response payoffs. We compute bounds on the recurrent classes of TNBR algorithms' associated Markov chains. Our bounds fall into two categories: first, "Performance" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms always have a high-value recurrent state; second, "Safety" bounds ensure that TNBR algorithms never have arbitrarily-bad recurrent states. Furthermore, these two types of bounds are linked by a waterbed-like effect: every game with a poor Safety guarantee necessarily has a favorable Performance guarantee.

cs.GT

Existence of the Core in Approval-Based Committee Elections

We settle the main open question in the theory of approval-based multi-winner elections: we show that there always exists a committee in the core. The core is a stability and group fairness concept. The proof introduces a new voting rule that optimizes an entropy-like objective function over committees and payment systems. All local optima of this objective function lie in the core, which implies that a core committee can be found in polynomial time.

cs.GT