aiqbench analysis
This paper addresses the critical challenge of integrating machine learning predictions into auction design, specifically distinguishing between genuine signal and "hallucinations" where plausible outputs lack factual correlation to buyer value. By developing a Bayesian model that accounts for both measurement noise and predictive failures, it provides actionable strategies for sellers to maximize revenue while hedging against unreliable AI forecasts. The work advances the intersection of game theory and machine learning reliability, offering robust frameworks for deploying ML in high-stakes economic environments.
Randomly Wrong Signals: Bayesian Auction Design with ML Predictions
arXiv:2502.08792v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Machine learning can help sellers predict buyers' willingness to pay, but its predictions may be plausible and yet entirely unrelated to a buyer's value. We introduce a Bayesian auction model that distinguishes such hallucinations from ordinary measurement noise. We characterize revenue-maximizing auctions with publicly disclosed predictions in the benchmark where informative predictions are exact. For a single buyer, this characterization explains when the seller should follow a prediction and when to hedge against its failure by ignoring it or capping the price. These insights guide the design of simple auctions that account for both hallucinations and measurement noise. Numerical experiments show that the resulting auctions achieve near-optimal revenue.
Abstract:Machine learning can help sellers predict buyers' willingness to pay, but its predictions may be plausible and yet entirely unrelated to a buyer's value. We introduce a Bayesian auction model that distinguishes such hallucinations from ordinary measurement noise. We characterize revenue-maximizing auctions with publicly disclosed predictions in the benchmark where informative predictions are exact. For a single buyer, this characterization explains when the seller should follow a prediction and when to hedge against its failure by ignoring it or capping the price. These insights guide the design of simple auctions that account for both hallucinations and measurement noise. Numerical experiments show that the resulting auctions achieve near-optimal revenue.
Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2502.08792 [cs.GT]
(or arXiv:2502.08792v4 [cs.GT] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.08792 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 206 words
Related coverage

Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · Sep 27, 2026

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · Oct 12, 2026

Challenge: Hand coding weights for efficient sequence memorisation
AI Alignment Forum · Jul 23, 2026
Synthesis Superintelligence: from Semiconductors to Superconductors — Periodic Labs’ Liam Fedus and Ekin Dogus Cubuk
Latent Space · Oct 8, 2026