MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619822963 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1449

Static teams with common information

2017· article· en· W2619822963 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Afshari, Aditya Mahajan

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffine transformationMathematical optimizationInformation structureComputer scienceQuadratic equationGaussianCommon knowledge (logic)MathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a static team problem in which agents observe correlated Gaussian observations and seek to minimize a quadratic cost. It is assumed that the observations can be split into two parts: common observations that are observed by all agents and local observations that are observed by individual agents. It is shown that the optimal strategies are affine and the corresponding gains can be determined by solving appropriate systems of linear equations. Two structures of optimal strategies are identified. The first may be viewed as a common-information based solution; the second may be viewed as a hierarchical control based solution. A decentralized estimation example is presented to illustrate the results.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicGame Theory and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207