MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186361480 · doi:10.21078/jssi-2021-255-11

A Hashing Power Allocation Game with and without Risk-free Asset

2021· article· en· W3186361480 on OpenAlexafffund
Yukun Cheng, Donglei Du, Qiaoming Han

Bibliographic record

Venue系统科学与信息学报(英文) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCryptocurrencyNash equilibriumComputer scienceStochastic gameHash functionAsset (computer security)Game theoryMicroeconomicsComputer securityEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Miners in various blockchain-backed cryptocurrency networks compete to maintain the validity of the underlying distributed ledgers to earn the bootstrapped cryptocurrencies. With limited hashing power, each miner needs to decide how to allocate their resource to different cryptocurrencies so as to achieve the best overall payoff. Together all the miners form a hashing power allocation game. We consider two settings of the game, depending on whether each miner can allocate their fund to a risk-free asset or not. We show that this game admits unique pure Nash equilibrium in closed-form for both settings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue系统科学与信息学报(英文)Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityFrench-language works237,207