analiza aiqbench
This research addresses the critical vulnerability of dishonest manipulation in LLM API ecosystems, where providers may secretly substitute models or inflate billing costs. By applying algorithmic game theory and mechanism design, the authors propose a formal economic model that guarantees an approximate incentive-compatible mechanism to protect user utility against strategic provider behaviors. The work establishes both constructive solutions with specific approximation ratios and fundamental impossibility results regarding expected user utility in this adversarial environment.
Pay for The Second-Best Service: A Game-Theoretic Approach Against Dishonest LLM Providers
arXiv:2511.00847v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) induces a critical vulnerability: the potential for dishonest manipulation by service providers. This manipulation can manifest in various forms, such as secretly substituting a proclaimed high-performance model with a low-cost alternative, or inflating responses with meaningless tokens to increase billing. This work tackles the issue through the lens of algorithmic game theory and mechanism design. We are the first to propose a formal economic model for a realistic user-provider ecosystem, where a user can iteratively delegate $T$ queries to multiple model providers, and providers can engage in a range of strategic behaviors. As our central contribution, we prove that for a continuous strategy space and any $\epsilon\in(0,\frac12)$, there exists an approximate incentive-compatible mechanism with an additive approximation ratio of $O(T^{1-\epsilon}\log T)$, and a guaranteed quasi-linear second-best user utility. We also prove an impossibility result, stating that no mechanism can guarantee an expected user utility that is asymptotically better than our mechanism. Furthermore, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our mechanism in simulation experiments with real-world API settings.
Abstract:The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) induces a critical vulnerability: the potential for dishonest manipulation by service providers. This manipulation can manifest in various forms, such as secretly substituting a proclaimed high-performance model with a low-cost alternative, or inflating responses with meaningless tokens to increase billing. This work tackles the issue through the lens of algorithmic game theory and mechanism design. We are the first to propose a formal economic model for a realistic user-provider ecosystem, where a user can iteratively delegate $T$ queries to multiple model providers, and providers can engage in a range of strategic behaviors. As our central contribution, we prove that for a continuous strategy space and any $\epsilon\in(0,\frac12)$, there exists an approximate incentive-compatible mechanism with an additive approximation ratio of $O(T^{1-\epsilon}\log T)$, and a guaranteed quasi-linear second-best user utility. We also prove an impossibility result, stating that no mechanism can guarantee an expected user utility that is asymptotically better than our mechanism. Furthermore, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our mechanism in simulation experiments with real-world API settings.
Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2511.00847 [cs.GT]
(or arXiv:2511.00847v5 [cs.GT] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.00847 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 277 cuvinte
