{"id":"W3125885139","doi":"","title":"Negotiation-proof Nash Equilibrium","year":2001,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"SSRN Electronic Journal","topic":"Business Strategy and Innovation","field":"Business, Management and Accounting","cited_by":1,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"McGill University","funders":"","keywords":"Nash equilibrium; Epsilon-equilibrium; Mathematical economics; Negotiation; Best response; Equilibrium selection; Trembling hand perfect equilibrium; Computer science; Solution concept; Futures studies; Sequential equilibrium; Correlated equilibrium; Bargaining problem; Economics; Microeconomics; Game theory; Repeated game; Political science; Artificial intelligence","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.002983274,0.0007091225,0.0008565244,0.0008851624,0.001834316,0.004237835,0.002002104,0.002609281,0.018257],"category_scores_gemma":[0.01186343,0.0003293338,0.000693029,0.0009300152,0.003809263,0.005346308,0.003390668,0.002070039,0.002347022],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.00244838,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.002995925,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.001891172,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.001562835,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9960839,0.001682643,0.0001825129,0.000564401,0.001052123,0.0004344421],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9960719,0.00217132,0.0003515354,0.0005020263,0.0005843919,0.0003186515],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_gemma":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00001023313,0.000009136496,0.00005619781,0.00002913347,0.000007342754,0.00004300174,0.00007994894,0.004196349,0.0001278855,0.9908353,0.00100327,0.003602248],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.00001990064,0.000008800565,0.00003245011,0.00002080565,0.000004187037,0.0000421553,0.00004424757,0.02516832,0.0001545836,0.9642483,0.01024822,0.00000807499],"study_design_candidate":"theoretical_or_conceptual","study_design_consensus":"theoretical_or_conceptual","genre_codex":"methods","genre_gemma":"methods","genre_scores_codex":[0.01922042,0.0006903958,0.6525971,0.003713511,0.0004278315,0.0003197482,0.0002547918,0.0002731541,0.3225031],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.8110436,0.000950041,0.1462796,0.001140268,0.0002186874,0.0007916178,0.0003022443,0.0001014604,0.03917251],"genre_candidate":"methods","genre_consensus":"methods","teacher_disagreement_score":0.018257,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.06107575,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.01292719982362866,"score_gpt":0.2211599400655943,"score_spread":0.2082327402419657,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}