MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W141916665 · doi:10.1115/1.802953.paper31

The Impact of Long-Term Memory in the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma

2009· book-chapter· en· W141916665 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueASME Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisoner's dilemmaTerm (time)DilemmaIterated functionComputer sciencePsychologyMathematicsEpistemologyPhilosophyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long term memory stores critical data for long periods of time. In this paper we show that the addition of long term memory grants agents playing the iterated prisoner's dilemma (IPD) a substantial competitive advantage. This paper extends previous work [1] in which IPD players utilized a limited subset of previous game actions to drive game-play. We introduce a novel representation of strategies for the IPD which consist of a pair of finite state machines - one which records long term memory into a set of scalar variables, and a second which drives actions based on the memory data. Control agents act in much the same way but do not have access to long term memories.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it