A Dynamic Game Model of Collective Choice in Multi-Agent Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspired by successful biological collective decision mechanisms such as honey bees searching for a new colony or the collective navigation of fish schools, we consider a mean field games (MFG)-like scenario where a large number of agents have to make a choice among a set of different potential target destinations. Each individual both influences and is influenced by the group's decision, as well as the mean trajectory of all the agents. The model can be interpreted as a stylized version of opinion crystallization in an election for example. The agents' biases are dictated first by their initial spatial position and, in a subsequent generalization of the model, by a combination of initial position and a priori individual preference. The agents have linear dynamics and are coupled through a modified form of quadratic cost. Fixed point based finite population equilibrium conditions are identified and associated existence conditions are established. In general multiple equilibria may exist and the agents need to know all initial conditions to compute them precisely. However, as the number of agents increases sufficiently, we show that 1) the computed fixed point equilibria qualify as epsilon Nash equilibria, 2) agents no longer require all initial conditions to compute the equilibria but rather can do so based on a representative probability distribution of these conditions now viewed as random variables. Numerical results are reported.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".