Expected Convergence Rate to Consensus in Asymmetric Networks: Analysis and Distributed Estimation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the expected rate of convergence to consensus in an asymmetric network represented by a weighted directed graph. The initial state of the network is represented by a random vector and the expectation is taken with respect to the random initial condition of the network. The proposed convergence rate is described in terms of the eigenvalues of the Laplacian matrix of the network graph. The generalized power iteration algorithm is then introduced based on the Krylov subspace method to compute the proposed expected convergence rate in a centralized fashion. To this end, the Laplacian matrix of the network is transformed to a new matrix such that existing techniques can be used to find the eigenvalue representing the expected convergence rate of the network. The convergence analysis of the centralized algorithm is performed with a prescribed upper bound on the approximation error of the algorithm. A distributed version of the centralized algorithm is then developed using the notion of consensus observer. The efficiency of the algorithms is subsequently demonstrated by simulations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it