Optimal Discrimination-Free Auctions

References

• Alaei S, Belloni A, Makhdoumi A, Malekian A (2024) Optimal auction design with deferred inspection and reward. Oper. Res. 72(6):2413–2429.Link, Google Scholar
• Alaoui L, Janezic KA, Penta A (2020) Reasoning about others’ reasoning. J. Econom. Theory 189:105091.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allouah A, Besbes O (2020) Prior-independent optimal auctions. Management Sci. 66(10):4417–4432.Link, Google Scholar
• Andreyanov P, Caoui EH (2022) Secret reserve prices by uninformed sellers. Quant. Econom. 13(3):1203–1256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong M (2000) Optimal multi-object auctions. Rev. Econom. Stud. 67(3):455–481.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Serizawa S (2012) Characterizing Vickrey allocation rule by anonymity. Soc. Choice Welfare 38:531–542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Dobzinski S, Lavi R (2012) Optimal lower bounds for anonymous scheduling mechanisms. Math. Oper. Res. 37(2):244–258.Link, Google Scholar
• Ashlagi I, Braverman M, Hassidim A, Monderer D (2010) Monotonicity and implementability. Econometrica 78(5):1749–1772.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ausubel LM (2004) An efficient ascending-bid auction for multiple objects. Amer. Econom. Rev. 94(5):1452–1475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Avery C, Hendershott T (2000) Bundling and optimal auctions of multiple products. Rev. Econom. Stud. 67(3):483–497.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Azrieli Y, Jain R (2018) Symmetric mechanism design. J. Math. Econom. 74:108–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Balseiro SR, Besbes O, Weintraub GY (2015) Repeated auctions with budgets in ad exchanges: Approximations and design. Management Sci. 61(4):864–884.Link, Google Scholar
• Bandi C, Bertsimas D (2014) Optimal design for multi-item auctions: A robust optimization approach. Math. Oper. Res. 39(4):1012–1038.Link, Google Scholar
• Bergemann D, Breuer K, Cramton P, Hirsch J, Ndiaye, J, Ockenfels A (2025) Soft-floor auctions: Harnessing regret to improve efficiency and revenue. Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper 2438, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
• Börgers T, Li J (2019) Strategically simple mechanisms. Econometrica 87(6):2003–2035.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Celis LE, Lewis G, Mobius M, Nazerzadeh H (2014) Buy-it-now or take-a-chance: Price discrimination through randomized auctions. Management Sci. 60(12):2927–2948.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen YJ (2017) Optimal dynamic auctions for display advertising. Oper. Res. 65(4):897–913.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen YJ (2021) Optimal design of revenue‐maximizing position auctions with consumer search. Production Oper. Management 30(9):3297–3316. Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen B, Knyazev D (2023) Symmetric mechanism design: Comment. J. Math. Econom. 109:102910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Shi C (2019) Joint pricing and inventory management with strategic customers. Oper. Res. 67(6):1610–1627.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Trichakis N (2021) On revenue management with strategic customers choosing when and what to buy. Oper. Res. 69(1):175–187.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Farias VF, Trichakis N (2019) On the efficacy of static prices for revenue management in the face of strategic customers. Management Sci. 65(12):5535–5555.Link, Google Scholar
• Deb R, Pai M (2017) Discrimination via symmetric auctions. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 9(1):275–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deng C, Pekeč S (2023) Optimal allocation of exclusivity contracts. Working paper, Duke University, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
• Dworczak P, Li J (2024) Are simple mechanisms optimal when agents are unsophisticated? Working paper, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.Google Scholar
• Duenyas I, Hu B, Beil DR (2013) Simple auctions for supply contracts. Management Sci. 59(10):2332–2342. Link, Google Scholar
• Gallien J (2006) Dynamic mechanism design for online commerce. Oper. Res. 54(2):291–310.Link, Google Scholar
• Gershkov A, Goeree J, Kushnir A, Moldovanu B, Shi X (2013) On the equivalence of Bayesian and dominant strategy implementation. Econometrica 81(1):197–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jehiel P, Lamy L (2015) On discrimination in auctions with endogenous entry. Amer. Econom. Rev. 105(8):2595–2643.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kagel JH, Harstad RM, Levin D (1987) Information impact and allocation rules in auctions with affiliated private values: A laboratory study. Econometrica 55(6):1275–1304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirkegaard R (2012) A mechanism design approach to ranking asymmetric auctions. Econometrica 80(5):2349–2364.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kirkegaard R (2022) Efficiency in asymmetric auctions with endogenous reserve prices. Games Econom. Behav. 132:234–239.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knyazev D, Rehsmann D (2023) Choose your auction: Mechanism design for a bidder. Preprint, submitted October 4, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4592327.Google Scholar
• Koçyiğit Ç, Iyengar G, Kuhn D, Wiesemann W (2020) Distributionally robust mechanism design. Management Sci. 66(1):159–189.Link, Google Scholar
• Korpela V (2018) Procedurally fair implementation under complete information. J. Math. Econom. 77:25–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kotowski MH (2018) On asymmetric reserve prices. Theoret. Econom. 13(1):205–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krähmer D, Strausz R (2015) Optimal sales contracts with withdrawal rights. Rev. Econom. Stud. 82(2):762–790.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kwasnica AM, Ledyard JO, Porter D, DeMartini C (2005) A new and improved design for multiobject iterative auctions. Management Sci. 51(3):419–434.Link, Google Scholar
• Laffont JJ, Maskin E (1980) A differential approach to dominant strategy mechanisms. Econometrica 48(6):1507–1520.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li S (2017) Obviously strategy-proof mechanisms. Amer. Econom. Rev. 107(11):3257–3287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lucking-Reiley D (2000) Vickrey auctions in practice: From nineteenth-century philately to twenty-first-century e-commerce. J. Econom. Perspect. 14(3):183–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Manelli A, Vincent D (2010) Bayesian and dominant-strategy implementation in the independent private-values model. Econometrica 78(6):1905–1938.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maskin E, Riley J (2000) Asymmetric auctions. Rev. Econom. Stud. 67(3):413–438.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mass H, Fugger N, Gretschko V, Wambach A (2020) Imitation perfection—A simple rule to prevent discrimination in procurement. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 12(3):189–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Myerson R (1981) Optimal auction design. Math. Oper. Res. 6(1):58–73.Link, Google Scholar
• Pai MM, Vohra R (2013) Optimal dynamic auctions and simple index rules. Math. Oper. Res. 38(4):682–697.Link, Google Scholar
• Pekeč AS, Tsetlin I (2008) Revenue ranking of discriminatory and uniform auctions with an unknown number of bidders. Management Sci. 54(9):1610–1623.Link, Google Scholar
• Segal I (2003) Optimal pricing mechanisms with unknown demand. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(3):509–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Serizawa S (1999) Strategy‐proof and symmetric social choice functions for public good economies. Econometrica 67(1):121–145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sprumont Y (1991) The division problem with single-peaked preferences: A characterization of the uniform allocation rule. Econometrica 59(2):509–519.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Subramaniam R, Venkatesh R (2009) Optimal bundling strategies in multiobject auctions of complements or substitutes. Marketing Sci. 28(2):264–273.Link, Google Scholar
• Van Ryzin G, Vulcano G (2004) Optimal auctioning and ordering in an infinite horizon inventory-pricing system. Oper. Res. 52(3):346–367.Link, Google Scholar
• Vulcano G, van Ryzin G, Maglaras C (2002) Optimal dynamic auctions for revenue management. Management Sci. 48(11):1388–1407.Link, Google Scholar
• Wasser C, Zhang M (2023) Differential treatment and the winner’s effort in contests with incomplete information. Games Econom. Behav. 138:90–111.Crossref, Google Scholar