MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061580930 · doi:10.1109/acc.2010.5530898

Nash equilibrium for communication protocols in decentralized discrete-event systems

2010· article· en· W2061580930 on OpenAlexaff
Waselul Haque Sadid, S.L. Ricker, Shahin Hashtrudi-Zad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicPetri Nets in System Modeling
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNash equilibriumComputer scienceGame theoryContext (archaeology)Best responseController (irrigation)Mathematical optimizationProtocol (science)Epsilon-equilibriumEvent (particle physics)Decentralised systemDistributed computingControl (management)Mathematical economicsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finding optimal communication strategies for a controller in a decentralized control setting is challenging because the best strategy depends on the choices of other controllers, all of whom are also trying to optimize their own strategies. An optimal strategy in this context is one that minimizes the cost of the communication protocol for each controller. Communication policies that satisfy Nash equilibrium, an important solution concept in game theory, are of particular interest. A recent algorithm for efficiently calculating a Nash equilibrium point for multi-agent systems in a game-theoretic setting is adapted for the problem of incorporating communication into decentralized discrete-event systems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPetri Nets in System ModelingFrench-language works237,207