Semantic Information Marketing in the Metaverse: A Learning-Based Contract Theory Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we address the problem of designing incentive mechanisms by a virtual service provider (VSP) to hire sensing IoT devices to sell their sensing data to help creating and rendering the digital copy of the physical world in the Metaverse. Due to the limited bandwidth, we propose to use semantic extraction algorithms to reduce the delivered data by the sensing IoT devices. Nevertheless, mechanisms to hire sensing IoT devices to share their data with the VSP and then deliver the constructed digital twin to the Metaverse users are vulnerable to adverse selection problem. The adverse selection problem, which is caused by information asymmetry between the system entities, becomes harder to solve when the private information of the different entities are multi-dimensional. We propose a novel iterative contract design and use a new variant of multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) to solve the modelled multi-dimensional contract problem. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our algorithm, we conduct extensive simulations and measure several key performance metrics of the contract for the Metaverse. Our results show that our designed iterative contract is able to incentivize the participants to interact truthfully, which maximizes the profit of the VSP with minimal individual rationality (IR) and incentive compatibility (IC) violation rates. Furthermore, the proposed learning-based iterative contract framework has limited access to the private information of the participants, which is to the best of our knowledge, the first of its kind in addressing the problem of adverse selection in incentive mechanisms.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".