MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599088153

A Theory and Experiments of Learning in Social Networks

2004· preprint· en· W1599088153 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shachar Kariv

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2004
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOpinion Dynamics and Social Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Social learningComputer scienceProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceInformation cascadeSocial network (sociolinguistics)Game theoryComplete informationPrivate information retrievalMachine learningMathematical economicsSocial psychologyPsychologyMathematicsKnowledge managementSocial media
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals living in society are bound together by a social network, the complex of relationships that brings them into contact with other agents. In many social and economic situations, individuals learn by observing the behavior of others in their local environment. This process is called social learning. Learning in incomplete networks, where different agents have different information sets, is especially challenging: because of the lack of common knowledge individuals must draw inferences about the actions others have observed as well as about their private information. Whether individuals can rationally process the information available in a network is ultimately an empirical question. This paper reports an experimental investigation of learning in three-person networks and uses the theoretical framework Gale and Kariv (2003) to interpret the data generated by the experiments. The family of three-person networks includes several nontrivial architectures, each of which gives rise to its own distinctive learning patterns. We find that the theory can account for the behavior observed in the laboratory in variety of networks and informational settings. To account for errors in subjects’ behavior, we adapt the model of Quantal Response Equilibrium of McKelvey and Palfrey (1995, 1998) and find that its restrictions are also confirmed. The ‘goodness of fit’ is better for the QRE model than for the game-theory model. This provides important support for the use of QRE to interpret experimental data.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicOpinion Dynamics and Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207