MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270478012

Specifying Nodes as Sets of Choices

2015· preprint· en· W2270478012 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A. Streufert

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralitySequence (biology)Tree (set theory)Computer scienceNode (physics)Set (abstract data type)Mathematical economicsTheoretical computer scienceGame theoryFinite setMathematicsCombinatoricsEconomicsEngineeringProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osborne and Rubinstein (1994) specify each node in a game tree as a sequence of actions.It is well-known that such actions can be replaced by choices (i.e.agent-specific actions) without loss of generality.I find that this sequential formulation is redundant in the sense that nodes can be equivalently specified as sets of choices.The only cost of doing so is to rule out absent-mindedness.My analysis encompasses both ordered and unordered information sets and both finite and infinite horizons.(This specification of nodes as sets of choices differs from the literature's specification of nodes as sets of outcomes.)

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicGame Theory and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207