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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
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

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPetri Nets in System ModelingFrench-language works237,207