MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

INACCESSIBLE CONTINUOUSLY STABLE STRATEGIES

2005· article· en· W1992378695 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Apaloo

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Resource Modeling · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEvolution and Genetic Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvolutionarily stable strategyConverseEvolutionary dynamicsStability (learning theory)PopulationMathematical economicsSelection (genetic algorithm)Bounded functionEcological successionEvolutionary game theoryValue (mathematics)Computer scienceGame theoryEcologyMathematicsBiologyArtificial intelligenceSociologyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT. The evolutionary stability concepts continuously stable strategies (CSS) and evolutionarily stable neighborhood invader strategies (ESNIS) share two properties in common. First, they are both evolutionarily stable strategies (ESS). Secondly, given any strategy in the close neighborhood of the CSS or ESNIS, there are some strategies that are closer to the CSS or ESNIS that can invade it. An ESNIS is a CSS but the converse is not true in general. We examine evolutionary adaptive dynamics in the neighborhood of a CSS that is not an ESNIS. We show that if an evolutionary game possesses a CSS which is not an ESNIS, the succession of strategies mediated by natural selection become arbitrarily close to the CSS but the precise value of the CSS cannot be attained unless the CSS is the first strategy to invade into the environment and is henceforth never perturbed. Thus if evolution does not start with the CSS that is not an ESNIS, we will have a phenomenon of bounded evolutionary succession that does not come to an end. The analysis is applied to a class of monomorphic population evolutionary game models in which species ecological interaction is modeled by the Lotka‐Volterra equations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural Resource ModelingSame topicEvolution and Genetic DynamicsFrench-language works237,207