MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120053557 · doi:10.1109/cdc42340.2020.9303904

On the exact convergence to Nash equilibrium in monotone regimes under partial-information

2020· article· en· W3120053557 on OpenAlexaff
Dian Gadjov, Lacra Pavel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNash equilibriumMonotone polygonMonotonic functionConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationBest responseGraphStrongly monotoneComputer scienceMathematical economicsRelaxation (psychology)Epsilon-equilibriumMathematicsApplied mathematicsTheoretical computer scienceEconomicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider distributed Nash equilibrium seeking in (non-strictly/strongly) monotone games. We assume first that each player has full access to the opponents' decisions and propose a new higher-order gradient play dynamics, constructed by a passivity-based modification of a standard scheme. We show that this technique allows relaxation of strict monotonicity of the pseudo-gradient and, unlike other methods, can ensure exact asymptotic convergence in merely monotone regimes. We consider next that players have only partial-decision information, and can communicate with their neighbours over an arbitrary undirected graph. To distribute the problem we augment the variables, so that each player has local decision and auxiliary state estimates. We modify the higher-order gradient dynamics via a distributed Laplacian feedback and show how we can exploit equilibrium-independent passivity properties to achieve convergence to a Nash equilibrium in monotone regimes, under different assumptions on the game map.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207