MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979004417 · doi:10.1142/s0219198900000081

EVOLUTIONARY AND DYNAMIC STABILITY IN SYMMETRIC EVOLUTIONARY GAMES WITH TWO INDEPENDENT DECISIONS

2000· article· en· W1979004417 on OpenAlexaff
Ross Cressman, Andrea Gaunersdorfer, Jean‐François Wen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Game Theory Review · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical economicsStability (learning theory)Stochastic gameNash equilibriumStatement (logic)Competition (biology)Evolutionarily stable strategyRisk dominanceBest responseEpsilon-equilibriumMathematicsEconomicsGame theoryComputer scienceEcologyBiologyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A two-decision competition model is developed where players may choose different strategies at different decisions knowing that their payoff at one decision is not affected by their performance at the other. It is shown that both static solution concepts of Nash and evolutionarily stable equilibria for the two-decision model are directly related to those of the separate decisions. Furthermore, if there are at most two pure strategies at each decision, dynamic stability can also be characterised through a separate analysis of each decision. However, when there are more than two strategies, this last statement is not always true.

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)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations31
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Game Theory ReviewSame topicGame Theory and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207