MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2241757945

Complexity, Environment, and Equitable Competition: A Theory of Adaptive International Rule Design

2011· article· en· W2241757945 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Ilg

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetitor analysisDiversity (politics)Competition (biology)IncentiveAdaptabilityIdeal (ethics)Complex adaptive systemCompetitive advantageLaw and economicsEconomic systemManagement sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsComputer scienceMicroeconomicsManagementLawArtificial intelligenceEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay addresses the question of whether the regulation of international competition might be conceived of in a manner that better anticipates and adapts around fundamental and unforeseen challenges. This essay presents a theory of diversity as a potential solution to problems of international coordination caused by changed systemic assumptions of a type represented by global environmental degradation. The theme of diversity refers to the differentiation of individual competitive strategies, and builds upon this notion to articulate an ideal of group benefit that is consistent with individuality and furthered by self-interest. The systemic goal to be achieved is responsiveness to fundamental change, and the means of solutions is argued to lie in a regulatory system designed to encourage the utmost attempts at ongoing innovation. The first advantage of diversity and differentiation is argued to be as a means of stable and adaptive progress; increasing the number of possible techniques with which to meet future challenges of a degree as presented by global environmental problems such as climate change. As the first principle of diversity entails a method for systemic responsiveness, the second principle gives content to this method by proposing that social goals should serve as the incentives encouraging competitors toward differentiation. The advantage offered is that social non-economic goals may be advanced in the present by looking to future adaptability, as individuals are encouraged toward new routes to personal reward via the satisfaction of collective objectives that previously had little or no economic value.As the ideal of diversity contemplates a method of systemic incentives, rather than mandated outcomes, the location of innovation remains individual competitors. Accordingly, the ideal of diversity is justified and articulated from a basis in individuality. Diversity is argued to be the optimal set of principles which individuals would select if given the ability to design a new competitive system anew and as if in abstraction. In joining a method of differentiation with the added social content of non-economic priority, diversity offers a unique blend of economic efficiency and equity; or of self-interest and concern for the welfare of others. Diversity allows an individual to think of their own pursuit of gain, but also and simultaneously further collective goals by selecting the priorities that should influence competitors toward differentiation. Ultimately, other’s welfare becomes a route to individual success.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207