MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025672821 · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2019.3485

Feature-Based Dynamic Pricing

2020· article· en· W3025672821 on OpenAlexaff
Maxime C. Cohen, Ilan Lobel, Renato Paes Leme

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegretComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)LogarithmDimension (graph theory)Feature vectorMathematical optimizationTime horizonProduct (mathematics)Value (mathematics)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the problem faced by a firm that receives highly differentiated products in an online fashion. The firm needs to price these products to sell them to its customer base. Products are described by vectors of features and the market value of each product is linear in the values of the features. The firm does not initially know the values of the different features, but can learn the values of the features based on whether products were sold at the posted prices in the past. This model is motivated by applications such as online marketplaces, online flash sales, and loan pricing. We first consider a multidimensional version of binary search over polyhedral sets and show that it has a worst-case regret which is exponential in the dimension of the feature space. We then propose a modification of the prior algorithm where uncertainty sets are replaced by their Löwner-John ellipsoids. We show that this algorithm has a worst-case regret which is quadratic in the dimension of the feature space and logarithmic in the time horizon. We also show how to adapt our algorithm to the case where valuations are noisy. Finally, we present computational experiments to illustrate the performance of our algorithm. This paper was accepted by Yinyu Ye, optimization.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations129
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement ScienceSame topicConsumer Market Behavior and PricingFrench-language works237,207