MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509454970

ANC Analytical Payoff Functions for Networks with Endogenous Bilateral Long Cheap Talk

2004· preprint· en· W1509454970 on OpenAlexaff
Ricardo Nieva

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGame Theory and Voting Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical economicsSuperadditivityInefficiencyStochastic gameValuation (finance)Link (geometry)Nash equilibriumMathematicsEconomicsCombinatoricsMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We derive an almost non cooperative (ANC) analytical payoff function for all three-agent Aumann-Myerson (1988) games, and tractable ones exist for all three-agent A-M-like network games with any fixed valuation, in contrast to restricted results in the literature, if at all. Unlike link proposal game A-M and Myerson (1986), ANC has dynamic bilateral cooperation as we assume bilateral long cheap talk among three agents (differing from A-Hart (2003)), i.e., (1) pairs "smooth" Nash bargain during link discussions over credible expected payoffs induced by equilibria of a Nash demand-like game-where a link forms if the two agents match (2) double proposals, i.e., payoffs that sum up to their Myerson values in the prospective graph, and future bilateral coordination schemes. Thus, payoffs in the final graph of ANC yield a "variable Myerson value pair" which accounts for future possibilities of link formation. Instead, A-M has (a) "fixed" Myerson values (1977). In ANC, key (b) multiple equilibria in A-M-with conflicting requests of two agents to an indifferent third one-are solved, as coordination on requests by earlier linked pairs prevails if credible. This follows from (3) almost assuming that schemes are reminded chronologically "behind closed doors" as there is almost a natural first-mover advantage. (c) Inefficiency is possible in A-M, but not in ANC. We state some of the complete analytics for A-M. Also, in strictly superadditive games, only two-link graphs form. If only a link-coalition of two-forms then they achieve the grand coalition's worth

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicGame Theory and Voting SystemsFrench-language works237,207