Consensus Using a Network of Finite Memory Pólya Urns
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
We introduce a finite memory interacting Pólya urn process over a connected network which models consensus dynamics for interacting individuals. More specifically, each urn (individual) in the network is initially equipped with some red and black balls, with the fraction corresponding to the individual’s opinion (or belief) on a certain color. At each time instant and for each urn, a ball is drawn from a “super-urn", which consists of all balls present in that urn and its neighboring urns; then reinforcing balls of the color just drawn are added to the urn for a limited period of M future time instants, where M denotes the memory parameter. Additionally, and important for our objective, as of time t=M+1, we remove the balls which were present in the urns initially. By examining the structure of the resulting underlying reducible Markov process, we show that individuals eventually reach consensus in the sense that they all achieve identical probabilities of drawing a red ball. Moreover, when the network has homogeneous reinforcement parameters, we construct a class of linear dynamical systems with time delay whose trajectory gives the probability of drawing a red ball for each node i at a time instant t. We examine the asymptotic behavior of such a network and exactly determine its consensus value. Our simulation confirms our theoretical findings by demonstrating the asymptotic behavior of draw variables of the network in some case studies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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