MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6890337325 · doi:10.34989/swp-2023-13

Learning in a Complex World: Insights from an OLG Lab Experiment

2023· article· en· W6890337325 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueEconstor (Econstor) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaBank of Canada
FundersUniversiteit van AmsterdamGeorge Mason University
KeywordsChaoticConvergence (economics)Steady state (chemistry)Quadratic equationNonlinear systemKey (lock)Dynamics (music)Complex dynamicsRate of convergenceState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper brings novel insights into group coordination and price dynamics in complex environments. We implement an overlapping-generation model in the lab where output dynamics are given by the well-known chaotic quadratic map. This model structure allows us to study previously unexplored parameter regions where perfect-foresight dynamics exhibit chaotic dynamics. This paper highlights three key findings. First, the price converges to the simplest equilibria, namely either the monetary steady state or the two-cycle in all markets. Second, we document a novel and intriguing finding: a non-monotonicity of the behavior when complexity increases. Convergence to the two-cycle occurs for the intermediate parameter range, while the extreme scenarios of both a simple, stable two-cycle and highly nonlinear dynamics (chaos) lead to coordination on the steady state in the lab. All indicators of coordination and convergence significantly exhibit this non-monotonic relationship in the learning-to-forecast experiments. This finding also persists in the learning-to-optimize design. Finally, convergence in the learning-to-optimize experiment is more challenging to achieve: coordination on the two-cycle is never observed, although the two-cycle Pareto dominates the steady state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconstor (Econstor)Same topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207