Contracting, Pricing, and Data Collection Under the AI Flywheel Effect

Huseyin Gurkan, F. Véricourt
{"title":"Contracting, Pricing, and Data Collection Under the AI Flywheel Effect","authors":"Huseyin Gurkan, F. Véricourt","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3566894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores how firms that lack expertise in machine learning (ML) can leverage the so-called AI Flywheel effect. This effect designates a virtuous cycle by which as an ML product is adopted and new user data are fed back to the algorithm, the product improves, enabling further adoptions. However, managing this feedback loop is difficult, especially when the algorithm is contracted out. Indeed, the additional data that the AI Flywheel effect generates may change the provider’s incentives to improve the algorithm over time. We formalize this problem in a simple two-period moral hazard framework that captures the main dynamics among ML, data acquisition, pricing, and contracting. We find that the firm’s decisions crucially depend on how the amount of data on which the machine is trained interacts with the provider’s effort. If this effort has a more (less) significant impact on accuracy for larger volumes of data, the firm underprices (overprices) the product. Interestingly, these distortions sometimes improve social welfare, which accounts for the customer surplus and profits of both the firm and provider. Further, the interaction between incentive issues and the positive externalities of the AI Flywheel effect has important implications for the firm’s data collection strategy. In particular, the firm can boost its profit by increasing the product’s capacity to acquire usage data only up to a certain level. If the product collects too much data per user, the firm’s profit may actually decrease (i.e., more data are not necessarily better). This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management.","PeriodicalId":119201,"journal":{"name":"Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information eJournal","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microeconomics: Asymmetric & Private Information eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3566894","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

This paper explores how firms that lack expertise in machine learning (ML) can leverage the so-called AI Flywheel effect. This effect designates a virtuous cycle by which as an ML product is adopted and new user data are fed back to the algorithm, the product improves, enabling further adoptions. However, managing this feedback loop is difficult, especially when the algorithm is contracted out. Indeed, the additional data that the AI Flywheel effect generates may change the provider’s incentives to improve the algorithm over time. We formalize this problem in a simple two-period moral hazard framework that captures the main dynamics among ML, data acquisition, pricing, and contracting. We find that the firm’s decisions crucially depend on how the amount of data on which the machine is trained interacts with the provider’s effort. If this effort has a more (less) significant impact on accuracy for larger volumes of data, the firm underprices (overprices) the product. Interestingly, these distortions sometimes improve social welfare, which accounts for the customer surplus and profits of both the firm and provider. Further, the interaction between incentive issues and the positive externalities of the AI Flywheel effect has important implications for the firm’s data collection strategy. In particular, the firm can boost its profit by increasing the product’s capacity to acquire usage data only up to a certain level. If the product collects too much data per user, the firm’s profit may actually decrease (i.e., more data are not necessarily better). This paper was accepted by Jayashankar Swaminathan, operations management.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能飞轮效应下的合同、定价和数据收集
本文探讨了缺乏机器学习(ML)专业知识的公司如何利用所谓的人工智能飞轮效应。这种效果标志着一个良性循环,通过这个良性循环,随着机器学习产品被采用,新的用户数据被反馈到算法中,产品得到改进,从而使进一步的采用成为可能。然而,管理这个反馈循环是困难的,特别是当算法被外包时。事实上,随着时间的推移,人工智能飞轮效应产生的额外数据可能会改变供应商改进算法的动机。我们将这个问题形式化为一个简单的两期道德风险框架,该框架捕捉了机器学习、数据获取、定价和合同之间的主要动态。我们发现,公司的决策在很大程度上取决于训练机器的数据量如何与提供者的努力相互作用。如果这种努力对更大数据量的准确性有更大(更小)的影响,公司就会低估(高估)产品的价格。有趣的是,这些扭曲有时会改善社会福利,这解释了客户剩余和企业和供应商的利润。此外,激励问题与人工智能飞轮效应的正外部性之间的相互作用对公司的数据收集策略具有重要意义。特别是,公司可以通过增加产品获取一定程度使用数据的能力来提高利润。如果产品在每个用户身上收集了太多的数据,公司的利润实际上可能会减少(也就是说,数据越多不一定越好)。这篇论文被运营管理的Jayashankar Swaminathan接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Quality and Pricing Decisions for Reward-based Crowdfunding: Effects of Moral Hazard Punish Underperformance with Resting Optimal Dynamic Contracts in the Presence of Switching Cost A reconsideration of the Rothschild-Stiglitz insurance market model by information theory Learning from Law Enforcement Pulp Friction: The Value of Quantity Contracts in Decentralized Markets
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1