Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).
Can society sustain long-run mutual trust when agents’ equilibrium beliefs are shaped by machine-learning predictive methods? I study an infinite-horizon game with state-dependent payoffs, in which each player in his turn decides whether to place trust in his immediate successor. Players best-reply to a probabilistic tit-for-tat belief, which is a coarse fit of the true population strategy with respect to a partition of relevant contingencies. In equilibrium, this partition minimises the sum of the mean squared prediction error and a complexity penalty proportional to its size. Relative to symmetric mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium, this solution concept can significantly narrow the scope for mutual trust.
No comments yet — start the discussion below.