Sponsored Search - California Institute of Technology
Download
Report
Transcript Sponsored Search - California Institute of Technology
Sponsored Search
Cory Pender
Sherwin Doroudi
Optimal Delivery of Sponsored Search
Advertisements Subject to Budget Constraints
Zoe Abrams
Ofer Mendelevitch
John A. Tomlin
Introduction
Search engines (Google, Yahoo!, MSN)
auction off advertisement slots on
search page related to user’s keywords
Pay per click
Earn millions a day through these
auctions
– Auction type is important
Sponsored search parameters
Bids
Query frequencies
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
– Not controlled by advertisers or search engine
– Few queries w/ large volume, many with low
volume
Advertiser budgets
Pricing and ranking algorithm
Solution
Focus on small subset of queries
– Predictable volumes in near future
– Constitute large amount of total volume
Sponsored search parameters
Bids
Query frequencies
Advertiser budgets
– Controlled by advertisers
Pricing and ranking algorithm
– Generalized second price (GSP) auction
– Rankings according to (bid) x (quality score)
– Charged minimum price needed to maintain rank
Goal: take these parameters into account,
maximize revenue
Motivating example
Reserve price is
Bidder
Bid for q1 Bid for q2 Budget
b1
C1 +
C1
C1
b2
C1
0
C1
b3
C1 -
C1 -
2 C1
Allocation Shown
for q1
Greedy
b1
Shown
for q2
b3
Total
Revenue
C1 +
Optimal
b1
2C1 -
b2
Problem Definition
Queries Q = {q1, q2, q3, ..., qN}
Bidders B = {b1, b2, b3, ..., bM}
Bidding state A(t); Aij(t) is j’s bid
for i-th query
dj is j’s daily budget
vi is estimate of query frequency
Li = {jp : jp B, p = 1, ..., Pi}
Lik = {jik : jik Li, l ≤ Lik ≤ P}
Ranking and revenue
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this
picture. and a
QuickTime™
Bid-ranking TIFF (LZW) decompressor
Revenue-ranking areQuickTi
neededme™
to see
andthis
a picture.
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
So, for slate k,
are needed to see this pi cture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
Price per click: are needed to see this picture.
Independent click through rates
Qu ickTime ™ a nd a
TIFF (L ZW) dec omp ress or
are nee ded to s ee th is p ictur e.
Revenue-per-search:
Total revenue:
Qui ckTime™ and a
TIFF ( LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this pi cture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Bidder’s cost
Total spend for j:
Quic kT ime™ and a
T IFF (LZW) dec ompres sor
are needed to s ee this pi cture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Linear program
Queries i = 1, ..., N
Bidders j = 1, ..., M
Slates k = 1, ..., Ki
Data: dj, vi, cijk, rik
Variables: xik
Constraints:
– Budget:
– Inventory:
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTi me™ and a
T IFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see thi s pi cture.
Objective function
Maximize revenue:
Value objective:
Clicks objective:
Quic kT ime™ and a
T IFF (LZW) dec ompres sor
are needed to s ee this pi cture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Column Generation
Each column represents a slate
Could make all possible columns
– But for each query, exponential in number
of bidders
Start with some initial set of columns
j: Marginal value for j’s budget
i: Marginal value for ith keyword
QuickTime™ and a
(LZW) decompressor
Profit if areTIFF
needed to see this picture.
Maximize
QuickTi me™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decom pressor
are needed to see this pi cture.
How to maximize?
If small number of bidders for a query,
enumerate all legal subsets Lik, find
maxima, see if adding increases profit
Otherwise, use algorithm described in
another paper
ebay.com
tigerdirect.com
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
?
nextag.com
priceline.com
Summary (so far)
Various bidders vying for spots on the slate
for each query
Constrained by budget, query frequencies,
ranking method
Solve LP for some initial set of slates
Check if profit can be made by adding new
slates
Re-solve LP, if necessary
Can be applied to maximize revenue or
efficiency
Simulation Methodology
Compare this method to greedy algorithm
– For greedy, assign what gets most revenue at the
time; when bidder’s budget is reached, take them
out of the pool
Used 5000 queries
For 11 days, retrieved hourly data on bidders,
bids, budgets
To determine which ads appear, assign based
on frequencies fik = xik/vi
After each hour, see if anyone has exceeded
budget
Simulation Results
Current method better than greedy
method, when optimizing over revenue
or efficiency
Larger gain for revenue when revenue
optimized
Revenue and efficiency are closely tied
Gains when efficiency is maximized
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Gains when revenue is maximized
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Impact on bidders
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Limitations
Illegitimate price hikes for other bidders
if one person exceeds budget in middle
of hour
Assumption that expected number of
clicks are correct
For the purposes of the simulation,
expect these to affect greedy and LP
optimization similarly
Future work
Focus on less frequent queries
– Frequencies harder to predict
– Some work has been done (doesn’t incorporate
pricing and ranking)
Keywords with completely unknown
frequencies
Parallel processing for submarkets
Investigate how advertisers might respond to
this method
– Potential changes in reported bids/budgets