Skip to main content
Log in

What Format for Multi-Unit Multiple-Bid Auctions?

Agent-Based Simulation of Auction Performance and Nonlinear Bidding Behaviour

  • Published:
Computational Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper uses computational experiments where bidders learn over nonlinear bidding strategies to compare outcomes for alternative pricing format for multi-unit multiple-bid auctions. Multi-unit multiple-bid auctions, in which bidders are allowed to submit multiple price-quantity bids, are promising mechanisms for the allocation of a range of resources. The main advantage of such auctions is to avoid the lumpy bid problem which arises when bidders can only compete on the basis of one bid. However, there is great uncertainty about the best auction formats when multi-unit auctions are used. The theory can only supply the expected structural properties of equilibrium strategies and the multiplicity of potential equilibria makes comparisons across auction formats difficult. Empirical studies and experiments have improved our knowledge of multi-unit auctions but they remain scarce and most experiments are restricted to two bidders and two units. Moreover, they demonstrate that bidders have limited rationality and learn through experience. This paper constructs an agent-based computational model of bidders to compare the performance of alternative procurement auction formats under circumstances where bidders submit continuous bid supply functions and learn over time to adjust their bids in order to improve their net incomes. The setting is for independent private values. We show that bidding behaviour displays more interesting patterns than is depicted in the theoretical literature and that bidding patterns depend on the interplay between heterogeneity in the bidder population and the degree of rationing in the auction. Results indicate that the three auction formats have similar performance for most levels of competition but that their performances differ when competition is weak. This ranking is dependent on whether the population of bidders is homogenous or heterogeneous.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alemsgeest P., Noussair C., Olson M. (1998) Experimental comparisons of auctions under single and multi-unit demand. Economic Inquiry 36: 87–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andreoni J., Miller J. H. (1995) Auctions with artificial adaptive agents. Games and Economic Behavior 58: 211–221

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel L. M. (2005) An efficient ascending-bid auction for multiple objects. American Economic Review 94: 1452–1475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, L. M., & Cramton, P. (2002) Demand reduction and inefficiency in multi-unit auctions. Working paper, University of Maryland.

  • Back K., Zender J. F. (1993) Auctions of divisible goods: On the rationale for the treasury experiment. Review of Financial Studies 6: 733–764

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binmore K., Swierzbinski J. (2000) Treasury auctions: Uniform or discriminatory?. Review of Economic Design 5: 387–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bower J., Bunn D. W. (2001) Experimental analysis of the efficiency of uniform price versus discriminatory auctions in the England and Wales electricity market. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 25: 561–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunn D. W., Oliveira F. S. (2001) Agent-based simulation: An application to the new electricity trading arrangements of England and Wales. IEEE transactions on Evolutionary Computation 5: 493–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer C. F. (2003) Behavioral game theory: Experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press: Russell Sage Foundation, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, J. (2006). Agent-based models and human-subject experiments. In K. L. Judd & L. Tesfatsion (Eds.), The handbook of computational economics (Vol. 2). Elsevier: Amsterdam (forthcoming).

  • Engelbrecht-Wiggan R., Kahn C. (1998) Multi-unit auctions with uniform prices. Economic Theory 12: 227–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, D., & Grimm, V. (2003). Bidding behaviour in multi-unit auctions—an experimental investigation and some theoretical insights. Working paper, CSERGE.

  • Epstein J. M., Axtell R. (1996) Growing artificial societies: Social sciences from the bottom up. Brookings Institution Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Erev I., Roth A. E. (1998) Predicting how people play games with unique, mixed strategy equilibria. American Economic Review 88: 848–881

    Google Scholar 

  • Hailu A., Schilizzi S. (2004) Are auctions more efficient than fixed price schemes when bidders learn?. Australian Journal of Management 29: 147–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hailu A., Thoyer S. (2006) Multi-unit auction format design. Journal of Economic Interaction and Co-ordination 1: 129–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hailu, A., & Thoyer, S. (2007, September). Designing multi-unit multiple bid auctions: An agent-based computational model of uniform, discriminatory and generalized Vickrey auctions. Economic Record, 83(S1), S57–S72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagel J, Levin D. (2001) Behavior in multi-unit demand auctions: Experiments with uniform price and dynamic Vickrey auctions. Econometrica 69(2): 413–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishna V. (2002) Auction theory. Academic Press Elsevier, London, p 303

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalewicz Z. (1996) Genetic algorithms + data structures = evolution programs. Springer-Verlag, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaisen J., Petrov V., Tesfatsion L. (2001) Market power and efficiency in a computational electricity market with discriminatory double-auction pricing. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 5: 504–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth A. E., Erev I. (1995) Learning in extensive form games: Experimental data and simple dynamic models in the intermediate term. Games and Economic Behavior 8: 164–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinkels J. (1999) Asymptotic efficiency for discriminatory private value auctions. Review of Economic Studies 66: 509–528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenorio R. (1993) Revenue equivalence and bidding behaviour in a multiunit auction market: An empirical analysis. The Review of Economics and Statistics 75: 302–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenorio R. (1999) Multiple unit auctions with strategic price-quantity decisions. Economic Theory 13: 247–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesfatsion L. (2002) Agent-based computational economics: Growing economies from the bottom up. Artificial Life 8: 55–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson R. (1979) Auctions of shares. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 93: 675–689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfram C. (1998) Strategic bidding in a multiunit auction: An empirical analysis of bids to supply electricity in England and Wales. Rand Journal of Economics 29: 703–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atakelty Hailu.

Additional information

This research was conducted when S. Thoyer was working at UWA (SARE) as an invited academic.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hailu, A., Thoyer, S. What Format for Multi-Unit Multiple-Bid Auctions?. Comput Econ 35, 189–209 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-010-9199-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-010-9199-x

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation