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
Linear quadratic graphon field games (LQ-GFGs) are defined to be LQ games which involve a large number of agents that are weakly coupled via a weighted undirected graph on which each node represents an agent. The links of the graph correspond to couplings between the agents' dynamics, as well as between the individual cost functions, which each agent attempts to minimize. We formulate limit LQ-GFG problems based on the assumption that these graphs lie in a sequence which converges to a limit graphon. First, under a finite-rank assumption on the limit graphon, the existence and uniqueness of solutions to the formulated limit LQ-GFG problem is established. Second, based upon the solutions to the limit LQ-GFG problem, epsilon-Nash equilibria are constructed for the corresponding game problems with a very large but finite number of players. This result is then generalized to the case with random initial conditions. It is to be noted that LQ-GFG problems are distinct from the class of graphon mean field game (GMFG) problems where a population is hypothesized to be associated with each node of the graph [Caines and Huang CDC 2018, 2019].
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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