# Price of Anarchy of Algorithmic Monoculture

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00444 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.00444/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2026.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Linguistic Monoculture in LLM-Assisted Language Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.27134/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Several recent works investigate the effects of monoculture, the ever increasing phenomenon of (possibly) self-interested actors in a society relying on one common source of advice for decision making, with an archetypal driving example being the growing adoption and predictive power of machine learning models in matching markets, e.g. in hiring. Kleinberg and Raghavan (PNAS, 2021) introduced a model that captures the effects of monoculture in a one-sided matching market with advice, demonstrating that a higher accuracy common signal (such as an algorithmic vendor) might incentivize society as a whole to rationally adopt it, but as a collective it would be better off if each instead adopted less accurate, but private advice. We generalize their model and address the open question of their work in quantifying the social welfare loss. We find that monoculture and more generally decentralized optimization is close to optimal: we show a tight constant bound of 2 on the price of anarchy (and more general notions) for the induced game.