Econophysics of a ranked demand and supply resource allocation problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a two sided resource allocation problem, between demands and supplies, where both parties are ranked. For example, in Big Data problems where a set of different computational tasks is divided between a set of computers each with its own resources, or between employees and employers where both parties are ranked, the employees by their fitness and the employers by their package benefits. The allocation process can be viewed as a repeated game where in each iteration the strategy is decided by a meta-rule, based on the ranks of both parties and the results of the previous games. We show the existence of a phase transition between an absorbing state, where all demands are satisfied, and an active one where part of the demands are always left unsatisfied. The phase transition is governed by the ratio between supplies and demand. In a job allocation problem we find positive correlation between the rank of the workers and the rank of the factories; higher rank workers are usually allocated to higher ranked factories. These all suggest global emergent properties stemming from local variables. To demonstrate the global versus local relations, we introduce a local inertial force that increases the rank of employees in proportion to their persistence time in the same factory. We show that such a local force induces non trivial global effects, mostly to benefit the lower ranked employees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".