Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.22781

Anytime Contracts for AI Services

Abstract

AI services are prone to moral hazard, as model providers can silently route requests to cheaper, lower-quality models, and the inherent stochasticity of model outputs makes this degradation hard to detect. Contract theory addresses moral hazard by designing payment rules that reward high-quality outputs and prevent strategic overcharging. However, existing frameworks assume interactions of fixed duration, whereas AI services are typically consumed through subscriptions and pay-as-you-go APIs that users can terminate at any time based on observed performance. We show that this flexibility can break standard contracts, opening them up to abuse by either the providers or users. To address this, we extend contract theory to account for unknown exit rules. We formalize the problem as a Principal-Agent game, and show that budget-optimal contracts in this setting are proportional to anytime-valid hypothesis tests based on likelihood-ratio e-values. We give an efficient algorithm for computing anytime contracts and show how betting e-processes can be used to approximate them when the models are unknown. Finally, we evaluate our findings on synthetic data and data from deployed LLMs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Boris Velasevic, Eden Saig, Eric Mazumdar. 2026-10-16. Anytime Contracts for AI Services. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.22781

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Adverse Effects of V2V Adoption on Road Safety

Vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication is expected to improve road safety and reduce congestion. However, prior work shows that V2V information sharing under partial adoption may increase congestion and decrease safety. We study whether increasing V2V adoption itself affects road safety. We propose a corrected version of an existing model and analyze its behavior under varying adoption levels. We show that, in some cases, increased V2V adoption can increase accident probability. However, under an optimal signaling policy, the system can ensure that accident probability is non-increasing in the adoption level.

cs.GT↗

Optimally Curating an Event

We study the optimal design of a self-financing event, a problem that requires balancing the recruitment of costly, positive-value participants with revenue-generating agents who may impose negative values on the event. We introduce a novel two-sided mechanism design framework with plus agents equipped with private costs and positive impact, and minus agents with private values and negative impact upon inclusion in the event, to maximize the overall quality of the event under a budget-balanced (BB) constraint so that the designer does not run a deficit. We conduct a comprehensive study on the theory of optimal event curation on various utility functions. For additive utility, we fully characterize the optimal incentive-compatible Bayesian mechanism under both the ex-ante and ex-post BB constraints. For submodular utility, we propose an ex-ante BB mechanism that achieves a constant-factor approximation to the optimal Bayesian mechanism.

cs.GT↗

The Source of Data Value: Consumer Disclosure, Access Design, and Platform Monetization

Digital marketplaces increasingly earn revenue from transaction commissions and seller-facing data services. Sellers may purchase data to increase revenue or avoid competing with an informed rival. We examine how consumer disclosure rights shape these motives and the platform's incentive to provide data. We develop a game-theoretic model of a commissioned platform, two differentiated sellers, and privacy-sensitive consumers. Data generates value through bilateral sales-revenue gains and competition threats arising from asymmetric access. Under mandatory collection, the platform can monetize defensive adoption, even when bilateral personalization reduces seller revenue. Under voluntary disclosure, anonymous purchasing and strictly positive privacy costs make unilateral disclosure unattractive in the baseline. Exclusive access thus yields no usable information, restores sellers' no-data rejection payoffs, and eliminates defensive fees. Profitable provision therefore requires nonnegative bilateral revenue gains. Under full fee extraction, sellers retain their no-data net profits. This revenue alignment does not guarantee welfare gains: additional transactions may benefit consumers, whereas segmentation in an already covered market can raise anonymous prices and reduce welfare. Capping anonymous offers at their no-data benchmark protects individual consumers and limits positive-mass provision to the transaction-creation region. Extensions consider access choice, heterogeneous privacy costs, imperfect identification, and limited contractual credibility. Platforms should evaluate data services based on both bilateral-use and seller-rejection outcomes, and sellers should distinguish revenue-enhancing from defensive investments. Regulators should distinguish equal-access rules from effective consumer control and monitor pricing in anonymous channels.

cs.GT↗