-
Battery Operations in Electricity Markets: Strategic Behavior and Distortions
Authors:
Jerry Anunrojwong,
Santiago R. Balseiro,
Omar Besbes,
Bolun Xu
Abstract:
Electric power systems are undergoing a major transformation as they integrate intermittent renewable energy sources, and batteries to smooth out variations in renewable energy production. As privately-owned batteries grow from their role as marginal "price-takers" to significant players in the market, a natural question arises: How do batteries operate in electricity markets, and how does the str…
▽ More
Electric power systems are undergoing a major transformation as they integrate intermittent renewable energy sources, and batteries to smooth out variations in renewable energy production. As privately-owned batteries grow from their role as marginal "price-takers" to significant players in the market, a natural question arises: How do batteries operate in electricity markets, and how does the strategic behavior of decentralized batteries distort decisions compared to centralized batteries?
We propose an analytically tractable model that captures salient features of the highly complex electricity market. We derive in closed form the resulting battery behavior and generation cost in three operating regimes: (i) no battery, (ii) centralized battery, and (ii) decentralized profit-maximizing battery. We establish that a decentralized battery distorts its discharge decisions in three ways. First, there is quantity withholding, i.e., discharging less than centrally optimal. Second, there is a shift in participation from day-ahead to real-time, i.e., postponing some of its discharge from day-ahead to real-time. Third, there is reduction in real-time responsiveness, or discharging less in response to smoothing real-time demand than centrally optimal. We quantify each of the three forms of distortions in terms of market fundamentals. To illustrate our results, we calibrate our model to Los Angeles and Houston and show that the loss from incentive misalignment could be consequential.
△ Less
Submitted 26 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
The Best of Many Robustness Criteria in Decision Making: Formulation and Application to Robust Pricing
Authors:
Jerry Anunrojwong,
Santiago R. Balseiro,
Omar Besbes
Abstract:
In robust decision-making under non-Bayesian uncertainty, different robust optimization criteria, such as maximin performance, minimax regret, and maximin ratio, have been proposed. In many problems, all three criteria are well-motivated and well-grounded from a decision-theoretic perspective, yet different criteria give different prescriptions. This paper initiates a systematic study of overfitti…
▽ More
In robust decision-making under non-Bayesian uncertainty, different robust optimization criteria, such as maximin performance, minimax regret, and maximin ratio, have been proposed. In many problems, all three criteria are well-motivated and well-grounded from a decision-theoretic perspective, yet different criteria give different prescriptions. This paper initiates a systematic study of overfitting to robustness criteria. How good is a prescription derived from one criterion when evaluated against another criterion? Does there exist a prescription that performs well against all criteria of interest? We formalize and study these questions through the prototypical problem of robust pricing under various information structures, including support, moments, and percentiles of the distribution of values. We provide a unified analysis of three focal robust criteria across various information structures and evaluate the relative performance of mechanisms optimized for each criterion against the others. We find that mechanisms optimized for one criterion often perform poorly against other criteria, highlighting the risk of overfitting to a particular robustness criterion. Remarkably, we show it is possible to design mechanisms that achieve good performance across all three criteria simultaneously, suggesting that decision-makers need not compromise among criteria.
△ Less
Submitted 18 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Robust Auction Design with Support Information
Authors:
Jerry Anunrojwong,
Santiago R. Balseiro,
Omar Besbes
Abstract:
A seller wants to sell an item to n buyers. Buyer valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a distribution unknown to the seller; the seller only knows that the support is included in [a, b]. To be robust, the seller chooses a DSIC mechanism that optimizes the worst-case performance relative to the first-best benchmark. Our analysis unifies the regret and the ratio objectives.
For these objectives, we de…
▽ More
A seller wants to sell an item to n buyers. Buyer valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a distribution unknown to the seller; the seller only knows that the support is included in [a, b]. To be robust, the seller chooses a DSIC mechanism that optimizes the worst-case performance relative to the first-best benchmark. Our analysis unifies the regret and the ratio objectives.
For these objectives, we derive an optimal mechanism and the corresponding performance in quasi-closed form, as a function of the support information and the number of buyers n. Our analysis reveals three regimes of support information and a new class of robust mechanisms. i.) With "low" support information, the optimal mechanism is a second-price auction (SPA) with random reserve, a focal class in earlier literature. ii.) With "high" support information, SPAs are strictly suboptimal, and an optimal mechanism belongs to a class of mechanisms we introduce, which we call pooling auctions (POOL); whenever the highest value is above a threshold, the mechanism still allocates to the highest bidder, but otherwise the mechanism allocates to a uniformly random buyer, i.e., pools low types. iii.) With "moderate" support information, a randomization between SPA and POOL is optimal.
We also characterize optimal mechanisms within nested central subclasses of mechanisms: standard mechanisms that only allocate to the highest bidder, SPA with random reserve, and SPA with no reserve. We show strict separations in terms of performance across classes, implying that deviating from standard mechanisms is necessary for robustness.
△ Less
Submitted 26 August, 2023; v1 submitted 15 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
On the Robustness of Second-Price Auctions in Prior-Independent Mechanism Design
Authors:
Jerry Anunrojwong,
Santiago R. Balseiro,
Omar Besbes
Abstract:
Classical Bayesian mechanism design relies on the common prior assumption, but such prior is often not available in practice. We study the design of prior-independent mechanisms that relax this assumption: the seller is selling an indivisible item to $n$ buyers such that the buyers' valuations are drawn from a joint distribution that is unknown to both the buyers and the seller; buyers do not need…
▽ More
Classical Bayesian mechanism design relies on the common prior assumption, but such prior is often not available in practice. We study the design of prior-independent mechanisms that relax this assumption: the seller is selling an indivisible item to $n$ buyers such that the buyers' valuations are drawn from a joint distribution that is unknown to both the buyers and the seller; buyers do not need to form beliefs about competitors, and the seller assumes the distribution is adversarially chosen from a specified class. We measure performance through the worst-case regret, or the difference between the expected revenue achievable with perfect knowledge of buyers' valuations and the actual mechanism revenue.
We study a broad set of classes of valuation distributions that capture a wide spectrum of possible dependencies: independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) distributions, mixtures of i.i.d. distributions, affiliated and exchangeable distributions, exchangeable distributions, and all joint distributions. We derive in quasi closed form the minimax values and the associated optimal mechanism. In particular, we show that the first three classes admit the same minimax regret value, which is decreasing with the number of competitors, while the last two have the same minimax regret equal to that of the single buyer case. Furthermore, we show that the minimax optimal mechanisms have a simple form across all settings: a second-price auction with random reserve prices, which shows its robustness in prior-independent mechanism design. En route to our results, we also develop a principled methodology to determine the form of the optimal mechanism and worst-case distribution via first-order conditions that should be of independent interest in other minimax problems.
△ Less
Submitted 18 January, 2024; v1 submitted 21 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Mechanism Design under Approximate Incentive Compatibility
Authors:
Santiago Balseiro,
Omar Besbes,
Francisco Castro
Abstract:
A fundamental assumption in classical mechanism design is that buyers are perfect optimizers. However, in practice, buyers may be limited by their computational capabilities or a lack of information, and may not be able to perfectly optimize. This has motivated the introduction of approximate incentive compatibility (IC) as an appealing solution concept for practical mechanism design. While most o…
▽ More
A fundamental assumption in classical mechanism design is that buyers are perfect optimizers. However, in practice, buyers may be limited by their computational capabilities or a lack of information, and may not be able to perfectly optimize. This has motivated the introduction of approximate incentive compatibility (IC) as an appealing solution concept for practical mechanism design. While most of the literature focuses on the analysis of particular approximate IC mechanisms, this paper is the first to study the design of optimal mechanisms in the space of approximate IC mechanisms and to explore how much revenue can be garnered by moving from exact to approximate incentive constraints. We study the problem of a seller facing one buyer with private values and analyze optimal selling mechanisms under $\varepsilon$-incentive compatibility. We establish that the gains that can be garnered depend on the local curvature of the seller's revenue function around the optimal posted price when the buyer is a perfect optimizer. If the revenue function behaves locally like an $α$-power for $α\in (1,\infty)$, then no mechanism can garner gains higher than order $\varepsilon^{α/(2α-1)}$. This improves upon state-of-the-art results which imply maximum gains of $\varepsilon^{1/2}$ by providing the first parametric bounds that capture the impact of revenue function's curvature on revenue gains. Furthermore, we establish that an optimal mechanism needs to randomize as soon as $\varepsilon>0$ and construct a randomized mechanism that is guaranteed to achieve order $\varepsilon^{α/(2α-1)}$ additional revenues, leading to a tight characterization of the revenue implications of approximate IC constraints. Our work brings forward the need to optimize not only over allocations and payments but also over best responses, and we develop a new framework to address this challenge.
△ Less
Submitted 24 March, 2022; v1 submitted 4 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
