MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106705281 · doi:10.1137/20m1381873

Continuous-Time Convergence Rates in Potential and Monotone Games

2022· article· en· W3106705281 on OpenAlexafffund
Bolin Gao, Lacra Pavel

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Control and Optimization · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonotone polygonMathematicsMonotonic functionConvergence (economics)Nash equilibriumDual (grammatical number)Descent (aeronautics)Space (punctuation)Characterization (materials science)Mathematical economicsCombinatoricsApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisComputer scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we provide exponential rates of convergence to the interior Nash equilibrium for continuous-time dual-space game dynamics such as mirror descent (MD) and actor-critic (AC). We perform our analysis in $N$-player continuous concave games that satisfy certain monotonicity assumptions while possibly also admitting potential functions. In the first part of this paper, we provide a novel relative characterization of monotone games and show that MD and its discounted version converge with $\mathcal{O}(e^{-\beta t})$ in relatively strongly and relatively hypomonotone games, respectively. In the second part of this paper, we specialize our results to games that admit a relatively strongly concave potential and show that AC converges with $\mathcal{O}(e^{-\beta t})$. These rates extend their known convergence conditions. Simulations are performed which empirically back up our 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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIAM Journal on Control and OptimizationSame topicGame Theory and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207