Reinforcement learning versus data-driven dynamic programming: a comparison for finite horizon dynamic pricing markets

Abstract Revenue management (RM) plays a vital role to optimize sales processes in real-life applications under incomplete information. The prediction of consumer demand and the anticipation of price reactions of competitors became key factors in RM to be able to apply classical dynamic programming (DP) methods for expected long-term reward maximization. Modern model-free deep Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches are able to derive optimized policies without explicit estimations of underlying model dynamics. However, RL algorithms typically require either vast amounts of training data or a suitable synthetic model to be trained on. As existing studies focus on one group of algorithms only, the relation between established DP approaches and new RL techniques is opaque. To address this issue, in this paper, we use a dynamic pricing framework for an airline ticket market to compare state-of-the-art RL algorithms and data-driven versions of classic DP methods regarding (i) performance and (ii) required data to each other. For the DP techniques, we use estimations of market dynamics to be able to compare their performance and data consumption against RL methods. The numerical results of our experiments, which include monopoly as well as duopoly markets, allow to study how the different approaches’ performances relate to each other in exemplary settings. In both setups, we find that with few data (about 10 episodes) fitted DP methods were highly competitive; with medium amounts of data (about 100 episodes) DP methods got outperformed by RL, where PPO provided the best results. Given large amounts of training data (about 1000 episodes), the best RL algorithms, i.e., TD3, DDPG, PPO, and SAC, performed similarly achieving about 90% and more of the optimal solution.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management
Published
2025-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41272-025-00519-8
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reinforcement learning versus data-driven dynamic programming: a comparison for finite horizon dynamic pricing markets

Rainer Schlößer, Leonard Dreeßen, Fabian Lange
2 citations
Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
4.57
article

Reinforcement learning versus data-driven dynamic programming: a comparison for finite horizon dynamic pricing markets

Rainer Schlößer, Leonard Dreeßen, Fabian Lange
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Revenue management (RM) plays a vital role to optimize sales processes in real-life applications under incomplete information. The prediction of consumer demand and the anticipation of price reactions of competitors became key factors in RM to be able to apply classical dynamic programming (DP) methods for expected long-term reward maximization. Modern model-free deep Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches are able to derive optimized policies without explicit estimations of underlying model dynamics. However, RL algorithms typically require either vast amounts of training data or a suitable synthetic model to be trained on. As existing studies focus on one group of algorithms only, the relation between established DP approaches and new RL techniques is opaque. To address this issue, in this paper, we use a dynamic pricing framework for an airline ticket market to compare state-of-the-art RL algorithms and data-driven versions of classic DP methods regarding (i) performance and (ii) required data to each other. For the DP techniques, we use estimations of market dynamics to be able to compare their performance and data consumption against RL methods. The numerical results of our experiments, which include monopoly as well as duopoly markets, allow to study how the different approaches’ performances relate to each other in exemplary settings. In both setups, we find that with few data (about 10 episodes) fitted DP methods were highly competitive; with medium amounts of data (about 100 episodes) DP methods got outperformed by RL, where PPO provided the best results. Given large amounts of training data (about 1000 episodes), the best RL algorithms, i.e., TD3, DDPG, PPO, and SAC, performed similarly achieving about 90% and more of the optimal solution.

Journal of Revenue and Pricing ManagementVol. 24(6)
Hasso Plattner Institute (DE), University of Potsdam (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Supply Chain and Inventory Management
4.57
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.