SHARP TEST FOR EQUILIBRIUM UNIQUENESS IN DISCRETE GAMES WITH PRIVATE INFORMATION AND COMMON KNOWLEDGE UNOBSERVED HETEROGENEITY
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
This paper proposes a test of the single equilibrium in the data assumption commonly maintained when estimating static discrete games of incomplete information. By allowing for discrete common knowledge payoff-relevant unobserved heterogeneity, the test generalizes existing methods attributing all correlation between players’ decisions to multiple equilibria. It does not require the estimation of payoffs and is therefore useful in empirical applications leveraging multiple equilibria to identify the model’s primitives. The procedure boils down to testing the emptiness of the set of data generating processes that can rationalize the sample through a single equilibrium and a finite mixture over unobserved heterogeneity. Under verifiable conditions, this testable implication is generically sufficient for degenerate equilibrium selection. The main identifying assumption is the existence of an observable variable that plays the role of a proxy for the unobservable heterogeneity. Examples of such proxies are provided based on empirical applications from the existing literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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