Social Cohesion and Cooperation for Public Goods
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
Abstract A cohesive network keeps groups together and enables members to communicate about and cooperate for public goods. For ongoing cooperation, group members have to know if their group members cooperate or defect, but this information—mostly through gossip—is threatened by noise and biases. If there are redundant information channels, however, errors in monitoring and transmission in one imperfect channel can, to some degree, be corrected by information through another imperfect channel, and may lead to higher levels of cooperation. An influential conceptualization of social cohesion based on redundancy is K-connectivity: the minimum number (K) of node-independent paths connecting pairs of nodes in a group’s network. In a lab experiment, we tested if higher K-connectivity yields higher levels of cooperation for public goods, controlling for a number of other network effects such as density, size, and average distance. We do not find the hypothesized effect, which might be due to a not-earlier-found shortcoming of the concept, and we propose a solution.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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