mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Supracompetitive Pricing Under AI Monoculture

arXiv 2601.01279 ↗First posted 3 Jan 2026econ.TH cs.AI cs.CEcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When competing sellers delegate pricing to a shared AI model, such as a large language model, correlated recommendations combined with performance-driven updates aggregating seller feedback raise a key question: can standard AI deployment practices inadvertently produce supracompetitive pricing? We develop a stylized duopoly model in which two sellers receive pricing recommendations from a shared AI characterized by two parameters: a propensity parameter capturing the model's tendency to set high prices and an output-fidelity parameter measuring alignment between this tendency and actual outputs, with propensity updated via periodic retraining on observed outcomes. We find that configuring AI models for robustness and reproducibility can lead to supracompetitive pricing via a phase transition. Below a critical output-fidelity threshold, competitive pricing is the unique stable outcome. Above it, the model exhibits bistability: both competitive and supracompetitive pricing are locally stable, with the realized outcome determined by the model's initial propensity. Supracompetitive pricing raises average prices, but occasional low-price recommendations complicate detection. With perfect output fidelity, full price coordination emerges from any interior initial propensity. For finite training batches of size b, when the initial propensity lies in the supracompetitive basin, the probability of supracompetitive pricing approaches 1 as b increases, with the region of indeterminate outcomes shrinking at rate O(1/√b). Any factor reducing alignment between the model's propensity and sellers' actual pricing, whether through diversifying AI providers, introducing recommendation noise, or reducing seller adherence, pushes the market toward competitive outcomes.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jan 2026.

Builds on

9 of 44 references.

References · 9

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2016Overcoming catastrophic forgetting in neural networkscited by 4,787
  3. 2018Continual Lifelong Learning with Neural Networks: A Reviewcited by 1,330
  4. 2021Algorithmic Monoculture and Social Welfarecited by 100
  5. 2022Picking on the Same Person: Does Algorithmic Monoculture lead to Outcome Homogenization?cited by 91
  6. 2024Shall We Team Up: Exploring Spontaneous Cooperation of Competing LLM Agentscited by 48
  7. 2025Framing the Game: How Context Shapes LLM Decision-Makingcited by 4
  8. 2018Dynamic Pricing and Learning with Competition: Insights from the Dynamic Pricing Challenge at the 2017 INFORMS RM & Pricing Conferencecited by 3
  9. 2025LLP: LLM-Based Product Pricing in E-commercecited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.