跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2605.12040 · v2

Position Auctions with a Capacity Constraint

首次提交 2026-05-12 20:23
版本更新 2026-10-26 19:43
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:36
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Sponsored search auctions are commonly modeled as an assignment of a fixed set of positions to a set of advertisers, with welfare maximization reducible to a standard matching problem. Motivated by modern advertising environments, we study a richer variant of the classical position auctions model, in which ads may have heterogeneous sizes and the platform must jointly select a subset of ads and assign them to positions subject to a global capacity constraint. The size of an ad can capture the physical space it occupies on a page or its consumption of a scarce platform resource, such as communication bandwidth or computational capacity. Thus, size measures the resource cost imposed by an ad on the platform, which need not be related to the value generated by displaying it. We begin by studying a general formulation of the matching with a capacity constraint problem and propose an algorithmic technique that goes beyond known greedy methods while achieving constant-factor approximation guarantees for social welfare. Our allocation rule augments density-based ordering with capacity-aware local improvements, which allow for re-allocations that improve welfare, while respecting the capacity constraint. Applied in the context of position auctions, we analyze this algorithm under the standard assumptions of single-parameter agents, publicly known ad sizes, and position-dependent click-through rates (CTRs). In this setting, the size of an ad determines the amount of capacity it consumes, while the CTR depends only on the position to which it is assigned. We show that a minor modification to our algorithmic approach yields a universally truthful mechanism that achieves a 4-approximation of the optimal social welfare, and we show that this guarantee is tight. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such mechanism for this variant of the capacity-constrained matching.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-10-26 19:43 · 最新观测版本

Position Auctions with a Capacity Constraint

Sponsored search auctions are commonly modeled as an assignment of a fixed set of positions to a set of advertisers, with welfare maximization reducible to a standard matching problem. Motivated by modern advertising environments, we study a richer variant of the classical position auctions model, in which ads may have heterogeneous sizes and the platform must jointly select a subset of ads and assign them to positions subject to a global capacity constraint. The size of an ad can capture the physical space it occupies on a page or its consumption of a scarce platform resource, such as communication bandwidth or computational capacity. Thus, size measures the resource cost imposed by an ad on the platform, which need not be related to the value generated by displaying it. We begin by studying a general formulation of the matching with a capacity constraint problem and propose an algorithmic technique that goes beyond known greedy methods while achieving constant-factor approximation guarantees for social welfare. Our allocation rule augments density-based ordering with capacity-aware local improvements, which allow for re-allocations that improve welfare, while respecting the capacity constraint. Applied in the context of position auctions, we analyze this algorithm under the standard assumptions of single-parameter agents, publicly known ad sizes, and position-dependent click-through rates (CTRs). In this setting, the size of an ad determines the amount of capacity it consumes, while the CTR depends only on the position to which it is assigned. We show that a minor modification to our algorithmic approach yields a universally truthful mechanism that achieves a 4-approximation of the optimal social welfare, and we show that this guarantee is tight. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such mechanism for this variant of the capacity-constrained matching.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗