Competition and Diversity in Generative AI

Recent evidence, both in the laboratory and in the wild, suggests that the use of generative artificial intelligence reduces the diversity of content produced. As generative AI penetrates more markets and reaches widespread adoption, should we still expect to see content homogenization? Our work begins with a simple observation: content producers do not act in isolation. Instead, they compete with one another (e.g., for customers or attention). We explore the impact competition has on both content diversity and overall social welfare when producers use generative AI. Through a formal game-theoretic model, we show that competitive markets select for diverse AI models, mitigating monoculture. We further show that a generative AI model that performs well in isolation (i.e., according to a benchmark) may fail to provide value in a competitive market. Our results highlight the importance of evaluating generative AI models across the breadth of their output distributions, particularly when they will be deployed in competitive environments. We validate our theoretical results with a series of experiments involving generative text and image models. Overall, our results suggest that homogenization due to generative AI is unlikely to persist under strong competition. This paper was accepted by Itai Ashlagi, market design, platform, and demand analytics. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2025.02761 .

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management Science
Published
2026-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2025.02761
Primary Topic
Game Theory and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Competition and Diversity in Generative AI

Manish Raghavan
Management Science
Game Theory and Applications
article

Competition and Diversity in Generative AI

Manish Raghavan
article en

Abstract

Recent evidence, both in the laboratory and in the wild, suggests that the use of generative artificial intelligence reduces the diversity of content produced. As generative AI penetrates more markets and reaches widespread adoption, should we still expect to see content homogenization? Our work begins with a simple observation: content producers do not act in isolation. Instead, they compete with one another (e.g., for customers or attention). We explore the impact competition has on both content diversity and overall social welfare when producers use generative AI. Through a formal game-theoretic model, we show that competitive markets select for diverse AI models, mitigating monoculture. We further show that a generative AI model that performs well in isolation (i.e., according to a benchmark) may fail to provide value in a competitive market. Our results highlight the importance of evaluating generative AI models across the breadth of their output distributions, particularly when they will be deployed in competitive environments. We validate our theoretical results with a series of experiments involving generative text and image models. Overall, our results suggest that homogenization due to generative AI is unlikely to persist under strong competition. This paper was accepted by Itai Ashlagi, market design, platform, and demand analytics. Supplemental Material: The online appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2025.02761 .

Management Science
IIT@MIT (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Game Theory and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.