Matching Value and Market Design in Online Advertising Networks: An Empirical Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advertising networks have recently played an increasingly important role in the online advertising market. Critical to the success of an advertising network are two mechanisms: an allocation mechanism that efficiently matches advertisers with publishers and a pricing scheme that maximally extracts surplus from the matches. In this paper, we quantify the value and investigate the determinants of a successful advertiser-publisher match, using data from Taobao’s advertising network. A counterfactual experiment reveals that the platform’s profit under a decentralized allocation mechanism is close to the profit level when the platform centrally assigns the matching under perfect platform knowledge of matching values. In another counterfactual experiment, we explore the effect of platform technology and revenue model on the strategic choice of the pricing schemes of list price versus generalized second price (GSP) auction pricing. We find that platforms that profit from the advertiser side may have less incentive to adopt GSP auction than platforms that profit from the publisher side.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it