Revenue Management with Repeated Customer Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by online advertising, we model and analyze a revenue management problem where a platform interacts with a set of customers over a number of periods. Unlike traditional network revenue management, which treats the interaction between platform and customers as one-shot, we consider stateful customers who can dynamically change their goodwill toward the platform depending on the quality of their past interactions. Customer goodwill further determines the amount of budget that they allocate to the platform in the future. These dynamics create a trade-off between the platform myopically maximizing short-term revenues, versus maximizing the long-term goodwill of its customers to collect higher future revenues. We identify a set of natural conditions under which myopic policies that ignore the budget dynamics are either optimal or admit parametric guarantees; such simple policies are particularly desirable since they do not require the platform to learn the parameters of each customer dynamic and only rely on data that is readily available to the platform. We also show that, if these conditions do not hold, myopic and finite look-ahead policies can perform arbitrarily poorly in this repeated setting. From an optimization perspective, this is one of a few instances where myopic policies are optimal or have parametric performance guarantees for a dynamic program with nonconvex dynamics. We extend our model to the cases where supply varies over time and where customers may not interact with the platform in every period. This paper was accepted by Chung Piaw Teo, 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".