https://arxiv.org/api/rOj5ErM1rI853DaRKb6EF22/DAY2026-03-20T12:44:44Z38103015http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.01250v3Persuading an inattentive and privately informed receiver2026-03-14T17:12:59ZThis paper studies the persuasion of a receiver who accesses information only if she exerts costly attention effort. A sender designs an experiment to persuade the receiver to take a specific action. The experiment affects the receiver's attention effort, that is, the probability that she updates her beliefs. Persuasion has two margins: an extensive (effort) and an intensive (action). The receiver's utility exhibits a supermodularity property in information and effort. By leveraging this property, we establish an equivalence between experiments and persuasion mechanisms à la Kolotilin et al.~(2017). In applications, the sender's optimal strategy involves censoring favorable states.2024-08-02T13:11:01ZPietro Dall'Arahttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.13634v1Multiplicity of Equilibria in the War of Attrition with Two-Sided Asymmetric Information2026-03-13T22:39:43ZThe war of attrition with two-sided asymmetric information is a foundational model in political economy, yet it generically admits a continuum of perfect Bayesian equilibria. This paper characterizes the sources of equilibrium multiplicity. We identify conditions on the type distribution that determine which form of multiplicity arises: when the lower limit of the hazard potential -- the integral of the hazard rate normalized by type -- diverges, the free parameter is the relative aggressiveness of strategies; when that limit is finite, the free parameter is the mass of types conceding immediately. We prove that the Amann-Leininger payoff perturbation and the introduction of behavioral types -- two seemingly distinct refinements -- are mathematically equivalent and succeed in selecting a unique equilibrium if and only if the type support is bounded. For unbounded supports, multiplicity persists. These results provide guidance for applied theorists: choosing distributions with bounded support ensures existing refinements deliver unique predictions.2026-03-13T22:39:43ZMartin Castillo-QuintanaGianfranco Miranda-Romerohttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.13599v1Dynamic Wholesale Pricing under Censored-Demand Learning2026-03-13T21:17:59ZWe study a finite-horizon dynamic wholesale-price contract between a manufacturer and a retailer, both of whom observe only sales, rather than the true demand. When the retailer stocks out, unmet demand is unobserved, so both parties update a common posterior over the demand distribution from sales data. Each period, the manufacturer sets the wholesale price, the retailer chooses an order quantity, and the public belief state is updated. We characterize Markov perfect equilibria as functions of this public belief. Our main results are as follows: for Weibull demand, we extend the well-known scaling approach to this strategic learning setting, prove the existence of an equilibrium, and reduce computation to a standardized one-parameter recursion; for exponential demand, we show that the equilibrium is unique and computable via a simple backward recursion.2026-03-13T21:17:59ZMichalis DeligiannisMarco ScarsiniXavier Venelhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12958v1Vocabulary aggregation2026-03-13T12:58:28ZA vocabulary is a list of words designating subsets from a grand set X. We model a vocabulary as a partition of X and study the aggregation of individual vocabularies into a collective one. We characterize aggregation rules when X is linearly ordered and each word of the vocabulary spans an order interval. We allow for individual vocabularies to differ both in the number and in the span of their words. Under a suitable restriction on agents' preferences, we show that our aggregation rules are strategy-proof.2026-03-13T12:58:28ZMarco LiCalziM. Alperen Yasarhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12630v1The Economics of AI Supply Chain Regulation2026-03-13T04:03:55ZThe rise of foundation models has driven the emergence of AI supply chains, where upstream foundation model providers offer fine-tuning and inference services to downstream firms developing domain-specific applications. Downstream firms pay providers to use their computing infrastructure to fine-tune models with proprietary data, creating a co-creation dynamic that enhances model quality. Amid concerns that foundation model providers and downstream firms may capture excessive consumer surplus, along with increasing regulatory measures, this study employs a game-theoretic model involving a provider and two competing downstream firms to analyze how policy interventions affect consumer surplus in the AI supply chain. Our analysis shows that policies promoting price competition in downstream markets (i.e., pro-price-competitive policies) boost consumer surplus only when compute or data preprocessing costs are high, while compute subsidies are effective only when these costs are low, suggesting these policies complement each other. In contrast, policies promoting quality competition in downstream markets (i.e., pro-quality-competitive policies) always improve consumer surplus. We also find that under pro-price-competitive policies or compute subsidies, both the provider and downstream firms can achieve higher profits along with greater consumer surplus, creating a win-win-win outcome. However, pro-quality-competitive policies increase the provider's profits while reducing those of downstream firms. Finally, as compute costs decline, pro-price-competitive policies may lose their effectiveness, whereas compute subsidies may shift from ineffective to effective. These findings offer insights for policymakers seeking to foster AI supply chains that are economically efficient and socially beneficial.2026-03-13T04:03:55ZAn earlier version of this paper, titled "The Economics of Fine-Tuning for Large-Scale AI Models," was presented at WISE 2023, where it won the Best Student Paper AwardSihan QianAmit MehraDengpan Liuhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2503.22928v3Optimal Control of an Epidemic with Intervention Design2026-03-13T02:23:25ZThis paper investigates the optimal control of an epidemic governed by a SEIR model with an operational delay in vaccination. We address the mathematical challenge of imposing hard healthcare capacity constraints (e.g., ICU limits) over an infinite time horizon. To rigorously bridge the gap between theoretical constraints and numerical tractability, we employ a variational framework based on Moreau--Yosida regularization and establish the connection between finite- and infinite-horizon solutions via $Γ$-convergence. The necessary conditions for optimality are derived using the Pontryagin Maximum Principle, allowing for the characterization of boundary-maintenance arcs where the optimal strategy maintains the infection level precisely at the capacity boundary. Numerical simulations illustrate these theoretical findings, quantifying the shadow prices of infection and costs associated with intervention delays.2025-03-29T01:21:16ZFor code and computational details in Python, please refer to \url{https://github.com/BehroozMoosavi/Codes/blob/main/Epidemic\%20With\%20Intervention/Epidemic.ipynb}Behrooz Moosavi Ramezanzadehhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12532v1Self-Confirming Mechanisms2026-03-13T00:22:13ZThis paper studies mechanism design environments in which the designer does not know the distribution of agents' private information a priori and instead learns from agents' behavior induced by the mechanism itself. We formalize a notion of self-confirming mechanisms and a refinement thereof, capturing the idea that an equilibrium mechanism is optimal given the designer's belief and that this belief is consistent with the information produced by the mechanism. We establish a fictitious revelation principle, showing that any incentive-compatible mechanism can be represented as a direct mechanism with filtered type reports that preserve the original mechanism's informational content. Applying the framework to a monopoly problem, we show that, subject to an equilibrium refinement, dominant-strategy self-confirming mechanisms are exactly posted-price mechanisms with locally revenue-maximizing prices.2026-03-13T00:22:13ZZhiming FengQingmin Liuhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2505.24440v4The Cost of Secure Restaking vs. Proof-of-Stake2026-03-12T19:37:51ZWe compare the total capital efficiency of secure restaking and Proof-of-Stake (PoS) protocols. First, we consider the sufficient condition for the restaking graph to be secure. The condition implies that it is always possible to transform such a restaking graph into separate secure PoS protocols. Next, we derive two main results: upper and lower bounds on the required extra stakes to add to the validators of the secure restaking graph to be able to transform it into secure PoS protocols. In particular, we show that the restaking savings compared to PoS protocols can be very large and can asymptotically grow as a square root of the number of validators. We also study a complementary question of aggregating secure PoS protocols into a secure restaking graph and provide matching lower and upper bounds on the PoS savings.2025-05-30T10:22:55ZAkaki MamageishviliBenny Sudakovhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2411.08026v2Incentive Design with Spillovers2026-03-12T13:55:06ZA principal uses payments conditioned on stochastic outcomes of a team project to elicit costly effort from the team members. We develop a multi-agent generalization of a classic first-order approach to contract optimization by leveraging methods from network games. The main results characterize the optimal allocation of incentive pay across agents and outcomes. Incentive optimality requires equalizing, across agents, a product of (i) individual productivity (ii) organizational centrality and (iii) responsiveness to monetary incentives. We specialize the model to explore several applied questions, including whether compensation should reward individual ability or collaborativeness and how the strength of complementarities shapes pay dispersion.2024-11-12T18:56:31ZKrishna DasarathaBenjamin GolubAnant Shahhttp://arxiv.org/abs/2502.19075v4Incomplete Information Robustness2026-03-12T10:04:11ZConsider an analyst who models a strategic situation using an incomplete information game. The true game may involve correlated, duplicated belief hierarchies, but the analyst lacks knowledge of the correlation structure and can only approximate each belief hierarchy. To make predictions in this setting, the analyst uses belief-invariant Bayes correlated equilibria (BIBCE) and seeks to determine which one is justifiable. We address this question by introducing the notion of robustness: a BIBCE is robust if, for every nearby incomplete information game, there exists a BIBCE close to it. Our main result provides a sufficient condition for robustness using a generalized potential function. In a supermodular potential game, a robust BIBCE is a Bayes Nash equilibrium, whereas this need not hold in other classes of games.2025-02-26T12:00:51ZStephen MorrisTakashi Uihttp://arxiv.org/abs/2512.21465v2A Note on Assortativeness Measures2026-03-12T06:23:40ZChiappori et al. (2025) study several indices of assortativeness in matching, including the aggregate likelihood ratio and the odds ratio. We provide a counterexample showing that their axiomatization of the aggregate likelihood ratio is not valid as stated. We identify the exact class of indices characterized by the axioms in Chiappori et al. (2025). We then show that the axiomatization of the aggregate likelihood ratio can be recovered by adding new axioms. In addition, we point out errors in the axiomatizations of other measures in Chiappori et al. (2025). Finally, we offer a generalization of the odds ratio from two-type markets to multi-type markets.2025-12-25T01:50:15Z21 pagesKenzo ImamuraSuguru OtaniTohya SuganoKoji Yokotehttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11560v1How Intelligence Emerges: A Minimal Theory of Dynamic Adaptive Coordination2026-03-12T05:28:28ZThis paper develops a dynamical theory of adaptive coordination in multi-agent systems. Rather than analyzing coordination through equilibrium optimization or agent-centric learning alone, the framework models agents, incentives, and environment as a recursively closed feedback architecture. A persistent environment stores accumulated coordination signals, a distributed incentive field transmits those signals locally, and adaptive agents update in response. Coordination is thus treated as a structural property of coupled dynamics rather than as the solution to a centralized objective.
The paper establishes three structural results. First, under dissipativity assumptions, the induced closed-loop system admits a bounded forward-invariant region, ensuring viability without requiring global optimality. Second, when incentive signals depend non-trivially on persistent environmental memory, the resulting dynamics generically cannot be reduced to a static global objective defined solely over the agent state space. Third, persistent environmental state induces history sensitivity unless the system is globally contracting.
A minimal linear specification illustrates how coupling, persistence, and dissipation govern local stability and oscillatory regimes through spectral conditions on the Jacobian. The results establish structural conditions under which intelligent coordination dynamics emerge from incentive-mediated adaptive interaction within a persistent environment, without presuming welfare maximization, rational expectations, or centralized design.2026-03-12T05:28:28ZStefano Grassihttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11453v1Persistence, patience and costly information acquisition2026-03-12T02:27:19ZA forward-looking agent observes signals of a state that follows a Gaussian AR(1) process. He chooses the signals' precisions sequentially, balancing their marginal cost and informativeness. I characterize his optimal learning strategy, and analyze his steady-state posterior beliefs and welfare. Higher persistence can tighten or loosen these beliefs, but always lowers welfare due to endogenously higher information costs. In contrast, higher patience raises welfare because the agent receives more information from his past selves.2026-03-12T02:27:19Z13 pages, 1 figureBenjamin Davieshttp://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11448v1Stochastic Optimization and Coupling2026-03-12T02:17:09ZWe study optimization problems in which a linear functional is maximized over probability measures that are dominated by a given measure according to an integral stochastic order in an arbitrary dimension. We show that the following four properties are equivalent for any such order: (i) the test function cone is closed under pointwise minimum, (ii) the value function is affine, (iii) the solution correspondence has a convex graph with decomposable extreme points, and (iv) every ordered pair of measures admits an order-preserving coupling. As corollaries, we derive the extreme and exposed point properties involving integral stochastic orders such as multidimensional mean-preserving spreads and stochastic dominance. Applying these results, we generalize Blackwell's theorem by completely characterizing the comparisons of experiments that admit two equivalent descriptions -- through instrumental values and through information technologies. We also show that these results immediately yield new insights into information design, mechanism design, and decision theory.2026-03-12T02:17:09Z103 pages, 4 figuresFrank YangKai Hao Yanghttp://arxiv.org/abs/2602.08144v3Competitive Sequential Screening2026-03-11T20:31:44ZWe study competition when firms contract with consumers before the consumers fully learn their product preferences. In a Hotelling duopoly, firms screen consumers by offering menus of option contracts. We characterize the unique equilibrium. Consumers select contracts from both firms. Each consumer is endogenously locked into the firm where he chooses the lower strike price, resulting in inefficient consumption. Yet competition is stiffer under earlier contracting because consumers are less informed and thus more homogeneous. Sufficiently early contracting raises consumer surplus relative to spot pricing -- reversing the ranking under monopoly. Exclusive contracting further increases consumer surplus by intensifying competition.2026-02-08T22:28:41ZIan BallDeniz KattwinkelJan Knoepfle