MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214559626 · doi:10.1137/20m136373x

Graphon Mean Field Games and Their Equations

2021· article· en· W3214559626 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Control and Optimization · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Graph Theory Research
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityMcGill University
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchNatural Environment Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsField (mathematics)Mathematical economicsApplied mathematicsCalculus (dental)Mathematical analysisPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of the graphon theory of large networks and their infinite limits has enabled the formulation of a theory of the centralized control of dynamical systems distributed on asymptotically infinite networks (Gao and Caines, IEEE CDC 2017, 2018). Furthermore, the study of the decentralized control of such systems was initiated in (Caines and Huang, IEEE CDC 2018, 2019), where Graphon Mean Field Games (GMFG) and the GMFG equations were formulated for the analysis of non-cooperative dynamic games on unbounded networks. In that work, existence and uniqueness results were introduced for the GMFG equations, together with an epsilon-Nash theory for GMFG systems which relates infinite population equilibria on infinite networks to finite population equilibria on finite networks. Those results are rigorously established in this paper.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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