arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2503.11270

Exploring Competitive and Collusive Behaviors in Algorithmic Pricing with Deep Reinforcement Learning

Abstract

Nowadays, a significant share of the business-to-consumer sector is based on online platforms like Amazon and Alibaba and uses AI for pricing strategies. This has sparked debate on whether pricing algorithms may tacitly collude to set supra-competitive prices without being explicitly designed to do so. Our study addresses these concerns by examining the risk of collusion when Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms are used to decide on pricing strategies in competitive markets. Prior research in this field focused on Tabular Q-learning (TQL) and led to opposing views on whether learning-based algorithms can result in supra-competitive prices. Building on this, our work contributes to this ongoing discussion by providing a more nuanced numerical study that goes beyond TQL, additionally capturing off- and on- policy Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithms, two distinct families of DRL algorithms that recently gained attention for algorithmic pricing. We study multiple Bertrand oligopoly variants and show that algorithmic collusion depends on the algorithm used. In our experiments, we observed that TQL tends to exhibit higher collusion and price dispersion. Moreover, it suffers from instability and disparity, as agents with higher learning rates consistently achieve higher profits, and it lacks robustness in state representation, with pricing dynamics varying significantly based on information access. In contrast, DRL algorithms, such as PPO and DQN, generally converge to lower prices closer to the Nash equilibrium. Additionally, we show that when pre-trained TQL agents interact with DRL agents, the latter quickly outperforms the former, highlighting the advantages of DRL in pricing competition. Lastly, we find that competition between heterogeneous DRL algorithms, such as PPO and DQN, tends to reduce the likelihood of supra-competitive pricing.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Shidi Deng, Maximilian Schiffer, Martin Bichler. 2025-03-14. Exploring Competitive and Collusive Behaviors in Algorithmic Pricing with Deep Reinforcement Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.11270

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN