skip to main content
10.1145/2433396.2433483acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswsdmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Optimizing budget constrained spend in search advertising

Published:04 February 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Search engine ad auctions typically have a significant fraction of advertisers who are budget constrained, i.e., if allowed to participate in every auction that they bid on, they would spend more than their budget. This yields an important problem: selecting the ad auctions which these advertisers participate, in order to optimize different system objectives such as the return on investment for advertisers, and the quality of ads shown to users. We present a system and algorithms for optimizing budget constrained spend. The system is designed be deployed in a large search engine, with hundreds of thousands of advertisers, millions of searches per hour, and with the query stream being only partially predictable. We have validated the system design by implementing it in the Google ads serving system and running experiments on live traffic. We have also compared our algorithm to previous work that casts this problem as a large linear programming problem limited to popular queries, and show that our algorithms yield substantially better results.

References

  1. Google automatic bidding product. http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=113234.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Google conversion optimizer product. http://www.google.com/adwords/conversionoptimizer/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Protocol buffers. Website, 2008. http://code.google.com/p/protobuf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Z. Abrams. Revenue maximization when bidders have budgets. In SODA, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Z. Abrams, S. Keerthi, O. Mendelevitch, and J. Tomlin. Ad delivery with budgeted advertisers: a comprehensive lp approach. J. Electronic Commerce Research, 9(1), 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. G. Aggarwal, A. Goel, and R. Motwani. Truthful auctions for pricing search keywords. In EC, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. C. Borgs, J. Chayes, N. Immorlica, K. Jain, O. Etesami, and M. Mahdian. Dynamics of bid optimization in online advertisement auctions. In Proc. of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pages 531--540. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. C. Borgs, J. Chayes, N. Immorlica, M. Mahdian, and A. Saberi. Multi-unit auctions with budget-constrained bidders. In EC, pages 44--51, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. N. Buchbinder, K. Jain, and J. Naor. Online Primal-Dual Algorithms for Maximizing Ad-Auctions Revenue. In ESA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. M. Cary, A. Das, B. Edelman, I. Giotis, K. Heimerl, A. Karlin, C. Mathieu, and M. Schwarz. Greedy bidding strategies for keyword auctions. In Proc. of the 8th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, pages 262--271. ACM New York, NY, USA, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. X. Charles, M. Chickering, N. R. Devanur, K. Jain, and M. Sanghi. Fast algorithms for finding matchings in lopsided bipartite graphs with applications to display ads. In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pages 121--128, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Y. Chen, P. Berkhin, B. Anderson, and N. Devanur. Real-time bidding algorithms for performance-based display ad allocation. In KDD, pages 1307--1315. ACM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. N. R. Devanur and T. P. Hayes. The adwords problem: online keyword matching with budgeted bidders under random permutations. In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pages 71--78, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. B. Edelman, M. Ostrovsky, and M. Schwarz. Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction. American Economic Review, 97(1):242--259, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. J. Feldman, M. Henzinger, N. Korula, V. S. Mirrokni, and C. Stein. Online stochastic packing applied to display ad allocation. In ESA (1), pages 182--194, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J. Feldman, N. Korula, V. S. Mirrokni, S. Muthukrishnan, and M. Pál. Online ad assignment with free disposal. In WINE, pages 374--385, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. J. Feldman, S. Muthukrishnan, M. Pal, and C. Stein. Budget optimization in search-based advertising auctions. In EC, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. S. Ghemawat, H. Gobioff, and S.-T. Leung. The Google File System. In 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. G. Goel and A. Mehta. Online budgeted matching in random input models with applications to Adwords. In SODA, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. K. Hosanagar and V. Cherepanov. Optimal bidding in stochastic budget constrained slot auctions. In EC, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. M. Mahdian, H. Nazerzadeh, and A. Saberi. Allocating online advertisement space with unreliable estimates. In EC, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. A. Mehta, A. Saberi, U. V. Vazirani, and V. V. Vazirani. Adwords and generalized online matching. J. ACM, 54(5), 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. R. Pike, S. Dorward, R. Griesemer, and S. Quinlan. Interpreting the data: Parallel analysis with sawzall. Scientific Programming Journal, 13:277--298, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. P. Rusmevichientong and D. Williamson. An adaptive algorithm for selecting profitable keywords for search-based advertising services. In EC, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. H. Varian. Position auctions. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 25(6):1163--1178, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. E. Vee, S. Vassilvitskii, and J. Shanmugasundaram. Optimal online assignment with forecasts. In ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, pages 109--118, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Optimizing budget constrained spend in search advertising

        Recommendations

        Reviews

        Amos O Olagunju

        Business organizations have limited advertising budgets. Consequently, Internet ad search engines should be designed to bid on advertisement auctions within budget constraints. The selection of ad auctions for competing advertisers is a two-sided problem. How does an auction search engine provide worthwhile ads to users, while simultaneously ensuring fail-safe investment profits for advertisers__?__ The authors of this paper investigate the issues of optimizing advertising budgets for auctions based on desired investment profits and ad quality. Typically, advertisers determine their participation in auctions within their budget constraints. However, the authors propose that a search engine could limit the participation of advertisers in auctions based on their budgets and ad objectives, such as increasing investment profits, decreasing cost-per-click, maximizing the quality of ads to display, and optimizing the ad quality relative to clicks. To that end, the authors design and implement a system equipped with optimization algorithms for fair allocations of budgets based on ad objectives. In the algorithms, the historical ad traffic data and existing budgets are used to (a) compute the impression probabilities for allowing advertisers to participate in auctions; (b) rank the impressions of each advertiser based on the ad objectives, for use in selecting the best impressions until the budget is expended; and (c) compress the impression ranks into a histogram to decide if an advertiser with a budget constraint should participate in a given auction. The accuracy and relevance of the bid optimized budget allocation algorithms for ad auctions are evaluated in offline and live simulation experiments. Contrary to the ad-auctioning algorithms proposed in this paper, at the exorbitant cost of processing times, the well-known linear programming algorithms [1,2] support the investigation of the effects of all budget constraints of advertisers. Unlike traditional bid algorithms [3], the authors offer an alternative bid-scaling algorithm to all advertisers. This paper proposes a family of throttling algorithms for optimizing the limited ad search budget advertisements that promise future ad opportunities for businesses. Ideally, businesses would be able to make decisions by weighing clicks-per-dollar, profit-per-dollar, and multiple advertisement objectives using reliable optimization algorithms. The authors present reliable algorithms and results for accomplishing these goals. Theoretical scientists should weigh in on the tradeoffs between processing times and memory used by complex optimization algorithms that promote more accurate ad auctions within budget constraints. Online Computing Reviews Service

        Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

        Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          WSDM '13: Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining
          February 2013
          816 pages
          ISBN:9781450318693
          DOI:10.1145/2433396

          Copyright © 2013 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 4 February 2013

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate498of2,863submissions,17%

          Upcoming Conference

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader