arXiv subjects

Jerry Anunrojwong

Publications and source records attributed to Jerry Anunrojwong.

11 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Robust Scale-Free Auctions

We study prior-independent auction design when bidder values are independently and identically distributed and the seller knows only a scale-invariant shape restriction on their distribution, but neither the distribution nor the scale of values. We show that the maximin problem over a broad class of dominant-strategy incentive-compatible mechanisms reduces without loss to scale-free mechanisms. For any $n\ge 2$ monotone-hazard-rate bidders, the second-price auction without a reserve is maximin optimal over this class, including randomized mechanisms that may allocate to a lower bidder. We derive its exact guarantee for every $n$ and the sharp exponential rate at which its loss relative to the Bayesian optimum vanishes. Many familiar auctions are standard: they allocate only to a highest bidder, although incentive compatibility does not require this. For two regular bidders, we solve the standard problem exactly: its optimal mechanism mixes the second-price auction with a relative-markup auction and achieves a worst-case ratio of approximately $0.524413$. We construct a nonstandard mechanism that sometimes allocates to the lower bidder and achieves approximately $0.524829$, proving that standardness is strictly costly. The contrast is driven by tail restrictions: monotone hazard rate makes lower-rank allocation unhelpful, whereas regularity permits it to improve worst-case revenue.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Battery Operations in Electricity Markets: Strategic Behavior and Distortions

Battery storage can reduce electricity generation costs by shifting energy across time, but as privately owned batteries become large, they may also be able to exert market power. We study how this market power distorts storage decisions in a two-settlement electricity market with stochastic demand and heterogeneous generator flexibility. We compare centralized battery operations, which minimize generation cost, with decentralized battery operations, in which each battery maximizes its own profit. For a baseline model with linear inverse supply curves, we characterize equilibrium battery policies and generation costs in closed form. Relative to centralized operations, a strategic battery distorts storage decisions in three ways: it withholds discharge, shifts participation from the day-ahead market to the real-time market, and responds too weakly to real-time demand fluctuations. These distortions raise generation cost, but the resulting efficiency loss admits tight, distribution-free bounds. We measure the resulting efficiency loss through the Price of Anarchy metric, which compares the cost reduction achieved by centralized batteries to that achieved by strategic batteries. For a single battery, the Price of Anarchy lies between $9/8$ and $4/3$; with $n$ competing batteries, the Price of Anarchy is bounded above by $1+1/(n(n+2))$. Similar bounds continue to hold in richer settings with capacity constraints, battery inefficiency, and virtual bidding. We also show why market power mitigation is subtle: interventions that target one distortion can backfire by redirecting behavior toward another and increasing system cost. Numerical experiments calibrated to California and Texas markets show that losses from a single strategic battery are meaningful but moderate, and that even limited battery competition brings the Price of Anarchy close to one across the specifications we study.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Residential Battery Pooling Under Backup Commitments

Residential batteries increasingly serve two roles: they can earn money by arbitraging wholesale prices and providing grid services, and they provide backup power during outages. This dual use creates a basic tradeoff between earning market value and preserving outage readiness. Coordination across many batteries can help, but a provider cannot treat the fleet as a single virtual battery when each household is promised its own backup protection. We compare standalone control, in which each home is dispatched independently, with pooling, in which homes are coordinated while each battery retains its own state of charge and household-specific backup requirement. Both regimes are implemented as model predictive control problems with 15-minute decision intervals and evaluated using household telemetry together with ERCOT market inputs. The empirical design focuses on the 543 homes in our sample that can support at least one backup product in standalone operation and studies backup caps ranging from 2 to 24 hours. Lower caps relax backup obligations, while the 24-hour cap coincides with assigning each home its own longest feasible backup tier. Pooling remains beneficial in this service-constrained setting, but its value declines smoothly as backup obligations tighten. Standalone firm margin ranges from \$11.06 per home per week at the 2-hour cap to \$10.79 at the 24-hour cap, while pooling benefit falls from \$1.49 to \$1.27 per home per week. Relative to standalone firm margin, pooling is worth about 13.5% at the 2-hour cap and about 11.8% at the 24-hour cap. Coordination therefore still helps after preserving household-level backup guarantees, but its value declines as backup obligations tighten.

eess.SY↗

arXiv2025

Social Learning under Platform Influence: Consensus and Persistent Disagreement

Individuals increasingly rely on social networking platforms to form opinions. However, these platforms typically aim to maximize engagement, which may not align with social good. In this paper, we introduce an opinion dynamics model where agents are connected in a social network, and update their opinions based on their neighbors' opinions and on the content shown to them by the platform. We focus on a stochastic block model with two blocks, where the initial opinions of the individuals in different blocks are different. We prove that for large and dense enough networks the trajectory of opinion dynamics in such networks can be approximated well by a simple two-agent system. The latter admits tractable analytical analysis, which we leverage to provide interesting insights into the platform's impact on the social learning outcome in our original two-block model. Specifically, by using our approximation result, we show that agents' opinions approximately converge to some limiting opinion, which is either: consensus, where all agents agree, or persistent disagreement, where agents' opinions differ. We find that when the platform is weak and there is a high number of connections between agents with different initial opinions, a consensus equilibrium is likely. In this case, even if a persistent disagreement equilibrium arises, the polarization in this equilibrium, i.e., the degree of disagreement, is low. When the platform is strong, a persistent disagreement equilibrium is likely and the equilibrium polarization is high. A moderate platform typically leads to a persistent disagreement equilibrium with moderate polarization. We analyze the effect of initial polarization on consensus and explore various extensions including a three block stochastic model and a correlation between initial opinions and agents' connection probabilities.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2025

Robust Auction Design with Support Information

A seller wants to sell an item to $n$ buyers. Buyer valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a distribution unknown to the seller; the seller only knows that the support is included in $[a, b]$. To be robust, the seller chooses a DSIC mechanism that optimizes the worst-case performance relative to the ideal expected revenue the seller could have collected with knowledge of buyers' valuations. Our analysis unifies the regret and the ratio objectives. For these objectives, we derive an optimal mechanism and the corresponding performance in quasi-closed form, as a function of the support information $[a, b]$ and the number of buyers $n$. Our analysis reveals three regimes of support information and a new class of robust mechanisms. i.) When $a/b$ is below a threshold, the optimal mechanism is a second-price auction (SPA) with random reserve, a focal class in earlier literature. ii.) When $a/b$ is above another threshold, SPAs are strictly suboptimal, and an optimal mechanism belongs to a class of mechanisms we introduce, which we call pooling auctions (POOL); whenever the highest value is above a threshold, the mechanism still allocates to the highest bidder, but otherwise the mechanism allocates to a uniformly random buyer, i.e., pools low types. iii.) When $a/b$ is between two thresholds, a randomization between SPA and POOL is optimal. We also characterize optimal mechanisms within nested central subclasses of mechanisms: standard mechanisms that only allocate to the highest bidder, SPA with random reserve, and SPA with no reserve. We show strict separations in terms of performance across classes, implying that deviating from standard mechanisms is necessary for robustness.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2024

On the Robustness of Second-Price Auctions in Prior-Independent Mechanism Design

Classical Bayesian mechanism design relies on the common prior assumption, but such prior is often not available in practice. We study the design of prior-independent mechanisms that relax this assumption: the seller is selling an indivisible item to $n$ buyers such that the buyers' valuations are drawn from a joint distribution that is unknown to both the buyers and the seller; buyers do not need to form beliefs about competitors, and the seller assumes the distribution is adversarially chosen from a specified class. We measure performance through the worst-case regret, or the difference between the expected revenue achievable with perfect knowledge of buyers' valuations and the actual mechanism revenue. We study a broad set of classes of valuation distributions that capture a wide spectrum of possible dependencies: independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) distributions, mixtures of i.i.d. distributions, affiliated and exchangeable distributions, exchangeable distributions, and all joint distributions. We derive in quasi closed form the minimax values and the associated optimal mechanism. In particular, we show that the first three classes admit the same minimax regret value, which is decreasing with the number of competitors, while the last two have the same minimax regret equal to that of the single buyer case. Furthermore, we show that the minimax optimal mechanisms have a simple form across all settings: a second-price auction with random reserve prices, which shows its robustness in prior-independent mechanism design. En route to our results, we also develop a principled methodology to determine the form of the optimal mechanism and worst-case distribution via first-order conditions that should be of independent interest in other minimax problems.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2024

The Best of Many Robustness Criteria in Decision Making: Formulation and Application to Robust Pricing

In robust decision-making under non-Bayesian uncertainty, different robust optimization criteria, such as maximin performance, minimax regret, and maximin ratio, have been proposed. In many problems, all three criteria are well-motivated and well-grounded from a decision-theoretic perspective, yet different criteria give different prescriptions. This paper initiates a systematic study of overfitting to robustness criteria. How good is a prescription derived from one criterion when evaluated against another criterion? Does there exist a prescription that performs well against all criteria of interest? We formalize and study these questions through the prototypical problem of robust pricing under various information structures, including support, moments, and percentiles of the distribution of values. We provide a unified analysis of three focal robust criteria across various information structures and evaluate the relative performance of mechanisms optimized for each criterion against the others. We find that mechanisms optimized for one criterion often perform poorly against other criteria, highlighting the risk of overfitting to a particular robustness criterion. Remarkably, we show it is possible to design mechanisms that achieve good performance across all three criteria simultaneously, suggesting that decision-makers need not compromise among criteria.

math.OC↗

arXiv2023

Persuading Risk-Conscious Agents: A Geometric Approach

We consider a persuasion problem between a sender and a receiver whose utility may be nonlinear in her belief; we call such receivers risk-conscious. Such utility models arise when the receiver exhibits systematic biases away from expected-utility-maximization, such as uncertainty aversion (e.g., from sensitivity to the variance of the waiting time for a service). Due to this nonlinearity, the standard approach to finding the optimal persuasion mechanism using revelation principle fails. To overcome this difficulty, we use the underlying geometry of the problem to develop a convex optimization framework to find the optimal persuasion mechanism. We define the notion of full persuasion and use our framework to characterize conditions under which full persuasion can be achieved. We use our approach to study binary persuasion, where the receiver has two actions and the sender strictly prefers one of them at every state. Under a convexity assumption, we show that the binary persuasion problem reduces to a linear program, and establish a canonical set of signals where each signal either reveals the state or induces in the receiver uncertainty between two states. Finally, we discuss the broader applicability of our methods to more general contexts, and illustrate our methodology by studying information sharing of waiting times in service systems.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2022

Information Design for Congested Social Services: Optimal Need-Based Persuasion

We study the effectiveness of information design in reducing congestion in social services catering to users with varied levels of need. In the absence of price discrimination and centralized admission, the provider relies on sharing information about wait times to improve welfare. We consider a stylized model with heterogeneous users who differ in their private outside options: low-need users have an acceptable outside option to the social service, whereas high-need users have no viable outside option. Upon arrival, a user decides to wait for the service by joining an unobservable first-come-first-serve queue, or leave and seek her outside option. To reduce congestion and improve social outcomes, the service provider seeks to persuade more low-need users to avail their outside option, and thus better serve high-need users. We characterize the Pareto-optimal signaling mechanisms and compare their welfare outcomes against several benchmarks. We show that if either type is the overwhelming majority of the population, information design does not provide improvement over sharing full information or no information. On the other hand, when the population is a mixture of the two types, information design not only Pareto dominates full-information and no-information mechanisms, in some regimes it also achieves the same welfare as the "first-best", i.e., the Pareto-optimal centralized admission policy with knowledge of users' types.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2020

Computing Equilibria of Prediction Markets via Persuasion

We study the computation of equilibria in prediction markets in perhaps the most fundamental special case with two players and three trading opportunities. To do so, we show equivalence of prediction market equilibria with those of a simpler signaling game with commitment introduced by Kong and Schoenebeck (2018). We then extend their results by giving computationally efficient algorithms for additional parameter regimes. Our approach leverages a new connection between prediction markets and Bayesian persuasion, which also reveals interesting conceptual insights.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2018

Naive Bayesian Learning in Social Networks

The DeGroot model of naive social learning assumes that agents only communicate scalar opinions. In practice, agents communicate not only their opinions, but their confidence in such opinions. We propose a model that captures this aspect of communication by incorporating signal informativeness into the naive social learning scenario. Our proposed model captures aspects of both Bayesian and naive learning. Agents in our model combine their neighbors' beliefs using Bayes' rule, but the agents naively assume that their neighbors' beliefs are independent. Depending on the initial beliefs, agents in our model may not reach a consensus, but we show that the agents will reach a consensus under mild continuity and boundedness assumptions on initial beliefs. This eventual consensus can be explicitly computed in terms of each agent's centrality and signal informativeness, allowing joint effects to be precisely understood. We apply our theory to adoption of new technology. In contrast to Banerjee et al. [2018], we show that information about a new technology can be seeded initially in a tightly clustered group without information loss, but only if agents can expressively communicate their beliefs.

cs.SI↗