Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.12374

The Privacy-Utility Trade-Off of Location Tracking in Ad Personalization

Mohammad Mosaffa·Omid Rafieian
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Firms collect vast amounts of behavioral and geographical data on individuals. While behavioral data captures an individual's digital footprint, geographical data reflects their physical footprint. Given the significant privacy risks associated with combining these data sources, it is crucial to understand their respective value and whether they act as complements or substitutes in achieving firms' business objectives. In this paper, we combine economic theory, machine learning, and causal inference to quantify the value of geographical data, the extent to which behavioral data can substitute for it, and the mechanisms through which it benefits firms. Using data from a leading in-app advertising platform in a large Asian country, we document that geographical data is most valuable in the early cold-start stage, when behavioral histories are limited. In this stage, geographical data complements behavioral data, improving targeting performance by almost 20%. As users accumulate richer behavioral histories, however, the role of geographical data shifts: it becomes largely substitutable, as behavioral data alone captures the relevant heterogeneity. These results highlight a central privacy-utility trade-off in ad personalization and inform managerial decisions about when location tracking creates value.

Explore related subjects

econ.EMcs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mohammad Mosaffa, Omid Rafieian. 2026-03-12. The Privacy-Utility Trade-Off of Location Tracking in Ad Personalization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.12374

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Difference-in-Differences with Unpoolable Data

Difference-in-differences (DID) is commonly used to estimate treatment effects but is infeasible in settings where data are unpoolable due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions on data sharing, particularly across jurisdictions. In this study, we identify and relax the assumption of data poolability in DID estimation. We propose an innovative approach to estimate DID with unpoolable data (UN-DID) which can accommodate covariates, multiple groups, and staggered adoption. Through analytical proofs and Monte Carlo simulations, we show that UN-DID and conventional DID estimates of the average treatment effect and standard errors are equal and unbiased in settings without covariates. With covariates, both methods produce estimates that are unbiased, equivalent, and converge to the true value. The estimates differ slightly but the statistical inference and substantive conclusions remain the same. Two empirical examples with real-world data further underscore UN-DID's utility. The UN-DID method allows the estimation of cross-jurisdictional treatment effects with unpoolable data, enabling better counterfactuals to be used and new research questions to be answered.

econ.EM↗
arXiv2026

The Promise of Time-Series Foundation Models for Agricultural Forecasting: Evidence from Commodity Prices

Forecasting agricultural markets remains challenging due to nonlinear dynamics, structural breaks, and sparse data. A long-standing belief holds that simple time-series methods outperform more advanced alternatives. This paper provides the first systematic evidence that this belief no longer holds with modern time-series foundation models (TSFMs). Using USDA ERS monthly commodity price data from 1997-2025, we evaluate 17 forecasting approaches across four model classes, including traditional time-series, machine learning, deep learning, and five state-of-the-art TSFMs (Chronos, Chronos-2, TimesFM 2.5, Time-MoE, Moirai-2), and construct annual marketing year price predictions to compare with USDA's futures-based season-average price (SAP) forecasts. We show that zero-shot foundation models consistently outperform traditional time-series methods, machine learning, and deep learning architectures trained from scratch in both monthly and annual forecasting. Furthermore, foundation models remarkably outperform USDA's futures-based forecasts on three of four major commodities despite USDA's information advantage from forward-looking futures markets. Time-MoE delivers the largest accuracy gains, achieving 54.9% improvement on wheat and 18.5% improvement on corn relative to USDA ERS benchmarks on recent data (2017-2024 excluding COVID). These results point to a paradigm shift in agricultural forecasting.

econ.EM↗
arXiv2026

Testing for Monotone Equilibrium Strategies in Games of Incomplete Information

This paper develops a unified framework for testing monotonicity of Bayesian Nash equilibrium strategies in unobserved types in games of incomplete information. We show that, under symmetric independent private types, monotonicity of differentiable equilibrium strategies is equivalent to monotonicity of a quasi-inverse strategy identified from observed actions. This allows the problem to be reformulated as testing a countable set of moment inequalities involving unconditional expectations. We propose a Cramer-von Mises-type statistic with bootstrap critical values. The method accommodates covariates and game heterogeneity. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate finite-sample performance, and an application to procurement auctions illustrates cartel detection.

econ.EM↗