Causal Inference on Stopped Random Walks in Online Advertising
在线广告中停止随机游走的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
本页整理公开书目信息,不生成学术质量评分。AI 解读根据题名及所注明的摘要或原文片段生成,未完成全文核验,可能有误;具体假设、证明与结论请核对原文。摘要保留来源文本,未经模型改写。
DOI 首次登记不等于接收或发表日期。部分更正、评论等条目没有独立摘要;缺少可靠材料时保留待补状态。
本页为预印本版本;arXiv 收录、作者填写的期刊信息以及作者既有发表经历,都不单独证明本篇已接收。作者发表记录按 OpenAlex 身份与完整姓名、本站覆盖期刊 ISSN 及正式卷期核对,只展示已核实例,档案仍可能误合并。
引用量采用 OpenAlex 单条关联记录,不合计多个记录;关联记录可能包含正式发表版本,不等于此版本单独引用。缺失不视为零,引用指标不代表论文质量。
关注作者按书目中的完整姓名匹配,同名和姓名变体需人工辨别。相关论文先按共享细分方向和具体方法排列,再参考通用方法与发表日期。
AI 根据所提供的论文材料归类:摘要研究广告机制实验的长期处理效应及其置信区间,直接对应因果推断。
在线广告中停止随机游走的因果推断AI 解读 ↓
正在核对关联版本…
正在核对对应版本的资源…
We consider a causal inference problem frequently encountered in online advertising systems, where a publisher (e.g., Instagram, TikTok) interacts repeatedly with human users and advertisers by sporadically displaying to each user an advertisement selected through an auction. Each treatment corresponds to a parameter value of the advertising mechanism (e.g., auction reserve-price), and we want to estimate through experiments the corresponding long-term treatment effect (e.g., annual advertising revenue). In our setting, the treatment affects not only the instantaneous revenue from showing an ad, but also changes each user's interaction-trajectory, and each advertiser's bidding policy -- as the latter is constrained by a finite budget. In particular, each a treatment may even affect the size of the population, since users interact longer with a tolerable advertising mechanism. We drop the classical i.i.d. assumption and model the experiment measurements (e.g., advertising revenue) as a stopped random walk, and use a budget-splitting experimental design, the Anscombe Theorem, a Wald-like equation, and a Central Limit Theorem to construct confidence intervals for the long-term treatment effect.