Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a formal game-theoretic model to analyze vertical foreclosure in inference markets for generative AI, highlighting mechanisms like quality-of-service discrimination and routing bias that can disadvantage downstream competitors without resorting to predatory pricing. An extension of the model incorporates tier-based access discrimination, revealing that the quality-of-service gap is influenced by factors such as inference-quality importance and API pricing. The findings indicate that major players like Google and OpenAI are particularly vulnerable to foreclosure, while proposing a framework for policy interventions that could yield significant economic benefits.
Major AI players face a growing risk of vertical foreclosure in inference markets, with potential annual gains from policy reforms reaching into the tens of billions.
As generative AI commercializes, competitive advantage is shifting from model training toward inference, distribution, and routing. This paper develops a formal game-theoretic model of vertical foreclosure in inference markets, as the formal-model companion to Besanson and Celani (2026). The model isolates two foreclosure mechanisms operating without predatory pricing: quality-of-service (QoS) discrimination against downstream rivals via latency, throughput, context limits, or feature access; and routing bias in assistant-layer interfaces. An extension motivated by Anthropic's April 2026 release of Claude Opus 4.7 alongside the restricted-access Claude Mythos Preview introduces a third mechanism, tier-based access discrimination, parameterized by a tier gap (tau) and partner-exclusivity (kappa). The main result gives an explicit local equilibrium characterization of the QoS gap. Under logit demand and symmetric rivals, the gap is strictly increasing in inference-quality importance (alpha) and downstream margins, and strictly decreasing in API price and rival entry elasticity. Discrimination vanishes at a joint boundary rather than at a simple threshold in alpha alone. A stylized calibration to four providers using April 2026 data treats parameter values as inputs to a comparative risk mapping, not structural estimates. The mapping suggests Google and OpenAI face conditions most conducive to foreclosure; Microsoft's realized routing bias has been voluntarily constrained by a March 2026 multi-model pivot; Anthropic shows low consumer-channel risk and elevated risk in enterprise coding-agent segments. The policy section proposes Neutral Inference, a four-pillar conduct framework: QoS parity, routing transparency, FRAND-style non-discrimination, and tier transparency with release-pathway discipline. Illustrative welfare calculations suggest net gains in the tens of billions annually.