Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Valid and Unobtrusive Measurement of Returns to Advertising through Asymmetric Budget Split

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2207.00206 v1 pith:SDWOK3GL submitted 2022-07-01 econ.EM

classification econ.EM
keywords budgetreturnsplatformasymmetricperformancesplitadvertisingmarketplace
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Ad platforms require reliable measurement of advertising returns: what increase in performance (such as clicks or conversions) can an advertiser expect in return for additional budget on the platform? Even from the perspective of the platform, accurately measuring advertising returns is hard. Selection and omitted variable biases make estimates from observational methods unreliable, and straightforward experimentation is often costly or infeasible. We introduce Asymmetric Budget Split, a novel methodology for valid measurement of ad returns from the perspective of the platform. Asymmetric budget split creates small asymmetries in ad budget allocation across comparable partitions of the platform's userbase. By observing performance of the same ad at different budget levels while holding all other factors constant, the platform can obtain a valid measure of ad returns. The methodology is unobtrusive and cost-effective in that it does not require holdout groups or sacrifices in ad or marketplace performance. We discuss a successful deployment of asymmetric budget split to LinkedIn's Jobs Marketplace, an ad marketplace where it is used to measure returns from promotion budgets in terms of incremental job applicants. We outline operational considerations for practitioners and discuss further use cases such as budget-aware performance forecasting.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Dynamic Synthetic Controls vs. Panel-Aware Double Machine Learning for Geo-Level Marketing Impact Estimation

    cs.LG 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A simulation benchmark finds panel-aware DML more robust than augmented synthetic controls in several geo-marketing stress tests, though coverage gains are inconsistent and no code is shipped.

Pith tools