MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415209079 · doi:10.3390/g16050054

Classifying Limited-Move Stability Cycles in 2 × 2 Games

2025· article· en· W4415209079 on OpenAlex
Leandro Chaves Rêgo, France E. G. de Oliveira, Giannini Italino Alves Vieira, D. Marc Kilgour

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

VenueGames · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicGame Theory and Applications
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)GraphStability (learning theory)PreferenceRepeated gameCoordination gameGame theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2×2 game is the simplest non-trivial model of strategic interaction: there are two players, each has two strategies, and each has a strict preference ranking over the four possible outcomes. For models of play that depend only on the ranking of the outcomes, the catalog of 2×2 games permits many useful comparisons and contrasts. By interpreting a 2×2 game as a graph model, we obtain new data on the properties of limited-move (Lh) stability. Specifically, for each 2×2 strict ordinal game, we determine the Lh-stable outcomes; show how stability depends on the horizon, h; and find the lengths of cycles and the numbers of moves until cycling begins. We then compare our observations with other classifications of these games and with the values of the conflict and harmony indices.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.416
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.291 · 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