IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vie/viennp/vie1707.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Robust Bidding in First-Price Auctions: How to Bid without Knowing what Otheres are Doing

Author

Abstract

Bidding optimally in first-price auctions is complicated. In the classical equilibrium framework, optimal bidding relies on detailed beliefs about other bidders' value distributions and bidding functions. This article shows how to and a robust bidding rule that does well with minimal information and thus achieves good performance in many situations. Robust bidding means to minimize the maximal difference between the payoff and the payo that could be achieved if one knew the other bidders' value distributions and bidding functions. We derive robust bidding rules under di erent scenarios, including complete uncertainty. Our bid recommendations are evaluated with experimental data.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernhard Kasberger & Karl H. Schlag, 2017. "Robust Bidding in First-Price Auctions: How to Bid without Knowing what Otheres are Doing," Vienna Economics Papers vie1707, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:vie:viennp:vie1707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papersecon.univie.ac.at/RePEc/vie/viennp/vie1707.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eddie Dekel & Asher Wolinsky, 2000. "Rationalizable Outcomes of Large Independent Private-Value First Price Discrete Auctions," Discussion Papers 1308, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. John H. Kagel & Alvin E. Roth, 2016. "The Handbook of Experimental Economics, Volume 2," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, volume 2, number 10874.
    3. Renou, Ludovic & Schlag, Karl H., 2011. "Implementation in minimax regret equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 527-533, March.
    4. René Caldentey & Ying Liu & Ilan Lobel, 2017. "Intertemporal Pricing Under Minimax Regret," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 104-129, February.
    5. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    6. Ken Binmore & Paul Klemperer, 2002. "The Biggest Auction Ever: the Sale of the British 3G Telecom Licences," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 74-96, March.
    7. Harrison, Glenn W, 1989. "Theory and Misbehavior of First-Price Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(4), pages 749-762, September.
    8. Michael H. Rothkopf, 2007. "Decision Analysis: The Right Tool for Auctions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 167-172, September.
    9. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    10. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2003. "Rationalizable bidding in first-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 38-72, October.
    11. Kin Chung Lo, 1998. "Sealed bid auctions with uncertainty averse bidders," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 12(1), pages 1-20.
    12. Dirk Bergemann & Karl H. Schlag, 2012. "Pricing Without Priors," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robust Mechanism Design The Role of Private Information and Higher Order Beliefs, chapter 12, pages 405-415, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Linhart, P. B. & Radner, R., 1989. "Minimax-regret strategies for bargaining over several variables," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 152-178, June.
    14. Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans, 1989. "The Effect of Regret on Optimal Bidding in Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(6), pages 685-692, June.
    15. Karl Schlag, 2008. "A new method for constructing exact tests without making any assumptions," Economics Working Papers 1109, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Hayashi, Takashi, 2008. "Regret aversion and opportunity dependence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 242-268, March.
    17. Chen, Yan & Katuscak, Peter & Ozdenoren, Emre, 2007. "Sealed bid auctions with ambiguity: Theory and experiments," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 513-535, September.
    18. William Vickrey, 1961. "Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 16(1), pages 8-37, March.
    19. Gabriel Carroll, 2015. "Robustness and Linear Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 536-563, February.
    20. Halpern, Joseph Y. & Pass, Rafael, 2012. "Iterated regret minimization: A new solution concept," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 184-207.
    21. Robles Jack & Shimoji Makoto, 2012. "On Rationalizability and Beliefs in Discrete Private-Value First-Price Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, May.
    22. In-Koo Cho, 2005. "Monotonicity and Rationalizability in a Large First Price Auction," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 1031-1055.
    23. René Caldentey & Ying Liu & Ilan Lobel, 2017. "Intertemporal Pricing Under Minimax Regret," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 104-129, February.
    24. Dekel, Eddie & Wolinsky, Asher, 2003. "Rationalizable outcomes of large private-value first-price discrete auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 175-188, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kasberger, Bernhard & Woodward, Kyle, 2021. "Bidding in Multi-Unit Auctions under Limited Information," MPRA Paper 111185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Schlag, Karl, 2018. "How to Play Out of Equilibrium: Beating the Average," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181525, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Mass, Helene, 2018. "Strategies under strategic uncertainty," ZEW Discussion Papers 18-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernhard Kasberger & Karl H. Schlag, 2017. "Robust Bidding in First-Price Auctions: How to Bid without Knowing what Otheres are Doing," Vienna Economics Papers 1707, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
    2. Dirk Bergemann & Karl Schlag, 2012. "Robust Monopoly Pricing," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robust Mechanism Design The Role of Private Information and Higher Order Beliefs, chapter 13, pages 417-441, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Makoto Shimoji, 2017. "Revenue comparison of discrete private-value auctions via weak dominance," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 21(4), pages 231-252, December.
    4. Wanchang Zhang, 2022. "Auctioning Multiple Goods without Priors," Papers 2204.13726, arXiv.org.
    5. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    6. Stoye, Jörg, 2011. "Axioms for minimax regret choice correspondences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(6), pages 2226-2251.
    7. Azrieli Yaron & Levin Dan, 2012. "Dominance Solvability of Large k-Price Auctions," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, May.
    8. Mass, Helene, 2018. "Strategies under strategic uncertainty," ZEW Discussion Papers 18-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Bernhard Kasberger, 2022. "An Equilibrium Model of the First-Price Auction with Strategic Uncertainty: Theory and Empirics," Papers 2202.07517, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    10. Dirk Bergemann & Benjamin Brooks & Stephen Morris, 2017. "First‐Price Auctions With General Information Structures: Implications for Bidding and Revenue," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 107-143, January.
    11. Evren, Özgür, 2019. "Recursive non-expected utility: Connecting ambiguity attitudes to risk preferences and the level of ambiguity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 285-307.
    12. Shimoji, Makoto & Schweinzer, Paul, 2015. "Implementation without incentive compatibility: Two stories with partially informed planners," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 258-267.
    13. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2003. "Rationalizable bidding in first-price auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 38-72, October.
    14. Pierpaolo Battigalli & Marciano Siniscalchi, "undated". "Rationalizable Bidding in General First-Price Auctions," Working Papers 190, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    15. Azrieli, Yaron & Levin, Dan, 2011. "Dominance-solvable common-value large auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 301-309.
    16. Kasberger, Bernhard & Woodward, Kyle, 2021. "Bidding in Multi-Unit Auctions under Limited Information," MPRA Paper 111185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. García-Pola, Bernardo, 2020. "Do people minimize regret in strategic situations? A level-k comparison," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 82-104.
    18. Renou, Ludovic & Schlag, Karl H., 2010. "Minimax regret and strategic uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(1), pages 264-286, January.
    19. Martín Egozcue & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2015. "Optimal output for the regret-averse competitive firm under price uncertainty," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 279-295, December.
    20. Pierpaolo Battigalli, 2006. "Rationalization In Signaling Games: Theory And Applications," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 67-93.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vie:viennp:vie1707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Paper Administrator (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econ.univie.ac.at/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.