MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951535374 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1210.5493

Mean Field Stochastic Adaptive Control

2012· preprint· en· W2951535374 on OpenAlexaff
Arman C. Kizilkale, Peter E. Caines

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationMathematicsApplied mathematicsDynamical systems theoryMathematical optimizationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For noncooperative games the mean field (MF) methodology provides decentralized strategies which yield Nash equilibria for large population systems in the asymptotic limit of an infinite (mass) population. The MF control laws use only the local information of each agent on its own state and own dynamical parameters, while the mass effect is calculated offline using the distribution function of (i) the population's dynamical parameters, and (ii) the population's cost function parameters, for the infinite population case. These laws yield approximate equilibria when applied in the finite population. In this paper, these a priori information conditions are relaxed, and incrementally the cases are considered where, first, the agents estimate their own dynamical parameters, and, second, estimate the distribution parameter in (i) and (ii) above. An MF stochastic adaptive control (SAC) law in which each agent observes a random subset of the population of agents is specified, where the ratio of the cardinality of the observed set to that of the number of agents decays to zero as the population size tends to infinity. Each agent estimates its own dynamical parameters via the recursive weighted least squares (RWLS) algorithm and the distribution of the population's dynamical parameters via maximum likelihood estimation (MLE). Under reasonable conditions on the population dynamical parameter distribution, the MF-SAC Law applied by each agent results in (i) the strong consistency of the self parameter estimates and the strong consistency of the population distribution function parameters; (ii) the long run average stability of all agent systems; (iii) a (strong) e-Nash equilibrium for the population of agents; and (iv) the a.s. equality of the long run average cost and the non-adaptive cost in the population limit.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.075 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207