Pay for The Second-Best Service: A Game-Theoretic Approach Against Dishonest LLM Providers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) induces a critical vulnerability: the potential for dishonest manipulation by service providers. This manipulation can manifest in various forms, such as secretly substituting a proclaimed high-performance model with a low-cost alternative, or inflating responses with meaningless tokens to increase billing. This work tackles the issue through the lens of algorithmic game theory and mechanism design. We are the first to propose a formal economic model for a realistic user-provider ecosystem, where a user can iteratively delegate T queries to multiple model providers, and providers can engage in a range of strategic behaviors. As our central contribution, we prove that for a continuous strategy space and any ε∈(0,frac12), there exists an approximate incentive-compatible mechanism with an additive approximation ratio of O(T1-εlog T), and a guaranteed quasi-linear second-best user utility. We also prove an impossibility result, stating that no mechanism can guarantee an expected user utility that is asymptotically better than our mechanism. Furthermore, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our mechanism in simulation experiments with real-world API settings.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Nov 2025.
Builds on
12 of 39 references.
References · 12
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2023How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?cited by 265
- 2023Can Language Models Solve Graph Problems in Natural Language?cited by 249
- 2025OverThink: Slowdown Attacks on Reasoning LLMscited by 94
- 2024Model Equality Testing: Which Model Is This API Serving?cited by 44
- 2025Are You Getting What You Pay For? Auditing Model Substitution in LLM APIscited by 35
- 2024Mechanism Design for LLM Fine-tuning with Multiple Reward Modelscited by 18
- 2023Fine-Tuning Games: Bargaining and Adaptation for General-Purpose Modelscited by 17
- 2017Multi-armed Bandit Problems with Strategic Armscited by 16
- 2025Is Your LLM Overcharging You? Tokenization, Transparency, and Incentivescited by 13
- 2024Incentivizing Quality Text Generation via Statistical Contractscited by 10
- 2024Algorithmic Contract Theory: A Surveycited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Your "Pro" LLM Subscription May Actually Be "Free": Exposing Fingerprint Spoofing Risks in LLM Inference Servicescited by 3
- 2026Test-Time Compute Gamescited by 2
- 2026Computational Arbitrage in AI Model Marketscited by 1
- 2026Deep Incentive Design with Differentiable Equilibrium Blockscited by 0
- 2026Post-Training at the Edge of Detectability: A Game-Theoretic Approach to Fine-Tuningcited by 0
- 2026Post-Training at the Edge of Detectability: A Game-Theoretic Approach to Fine-Tuning29 Jul 2026
- 2026Your "Pro" LLM Subscription May Actually Be "Free": Exposing Fingerprint Spoofing Risks in LLM Inference Services15 Jun 2026
- 2026Computational Arbitrage in AI Model Markets23 Mar 2026
- 2026Deep Incentive Design with Differentiable Equilibrium Blocks8 Mar 2026
- 2026Test-Time Compute Games29 Jan 2026