Category: Games
Nonsense paper accepted by mathematics journal
Last month That’s Mathematics! reported another landmark event in the history of academic publishing. A paper by Marcie Rathke of the University of Southern North Dakota at Hoople had been provisionally accepted for publication in Advances in Pure Mathematics. ‘Independent, Negative, Canonically Turing Arrows of Equations and Problems in Applied Formal PDE’…
Each of these sentences [of the paper] contains mathematical nouns linked by the verbs mathematicians use, but the sentences scarcely connect with each other. The paper was created using Mathgen, an online random maths paper generator. Mathgen has a set of rules that define how papers are arranged in sections and what kinds of sentence make up a section and how those sentences are made up from different categories of technical and non-technical words. It creates beautifully formatted papers with the conventional structure, complete with equations and citations but, alas, totally devoid of meaning. Nate Eldredge – the blogger behind That’s Mathematics! – wrote Mathgen by adapting SCIgen, which does something similar for computer science. Papers generated by SCIgen have been accepted for publication at academic conferences and journals that claim to carry out peer review.
The article is here and it also excerpts from the referee reports, for instance:
We can’t catch the main thought from this abstract. So I suggest that the author can reorganise the descriptions and give the keywords of this paper.
For the pointer I thank Mark Thorson.
Crowdsourcing the lowest fare
Travelers with complex travel plans may have noticed, however, that the search results aren’t necessarily consistent. This has created a business opportunity for Flightfox, a start-up company based in Mountain View, Calif., which uses a contest format to come up with the best fare that the crowd — all Flightfox-approved users — can find.
A traveler goes to Flightfox.com and sets up a competition, supplying information about the desired itinerary and clarifying a few preferences, like a willingness to “fly on any airline to save money” or a tolerance of “long layovers to save money.” Once Flightfox posts the contest, the crowd is invited to go to work and submit fares.
The contest runs three days, and the winner, the person who finds the lowest fare, gets 75 percent of the finder’s fee that the traveler pays Flightfox when setting up the competition. Flightfox says fees depend on the complexity of the itinerary; many current contests have fees in the $34-to-$59 range.
Here is more, and for the pointer I thank @ArikSharon.
The equilibrium (with apologies to Daniel Klein)
On September 5, the first Sleeping Beauty in Polataiko’s exhibition awoke to a kiss from another woman. Both of them were surprised. Polataiko shot photos of them laughing and looking at each other. Then he posted the images to his Facebook profile, where he has been live-blogging the entire event. Now the Sleeping Beauty must wed her “prince,” thus queering the historically heteronormative fairtytale. Gay marriage is not allowed in the Ukraine, however, so these two women will have to wed in a European country that does allow for same-sex marriage.
Here is more. I believe that none of you had solved for this equilibrium. For the pointer I thank Eapen.
The next transformational technology?
Noah Smith writes:
Addendum: I seem to be the only person talking about Desire Modification as a transformational technology. Greg Egan and Vernor Vinge have written books in which this technology plays a central role. In my “spare time” I’m writing a couple of sci-fi short stories based on the idea. It’s a really big deal, and I’ll write a post about it soon.
The path dependence of astronaut walks
…there was a fierce behind-the-scenes battle between them to be first to set foot on the Moon. Early plans were for Aldrin, as module pilot, to step out first, but one version reported by Smith has it that Armstrong, as mission commander, lobbied more vigorously than Aldrin, and Nasa backed him up because he would be ‘better equipped to handle the clamour when he got back’ and, more mundanely, because his seat in the lunar module was closer to the door. Aldrin paid Armstrong back by taking no photographs of him on the Moon: the only manually taken lunar image of the First Man on the Moon is in one of many pictures Armstrong snapped of Aldrin, showing himself reflected in the visor of Aldrin’s spacesuit.
That is from this excellent Steve Shapin article, hat tip goes to @MauraCunningham. I liked this part:
…they were on the same basic pay rates as other US military officers: most were captains, making about $17,000 a year. (On their missions to the Moon, they were entitled only to the standard $8 per diem for being away from base, with deductions for ‘accommodation’ provided in the spaceship.)
Solve for the equilibrium
Here is the short video. Here is text with photos and another video. Five Ukrainian women, in an Ukrainian art museum. They are sleeping, or rather pretending to sleep, dressed up as Sleeping Beauty. Men come along and kiss them, on the lips, with each man allowed only one kiss. They have all signed legally binding contracts. If a woman responds to a kiss by opening her eyes and “waking,” she must marry the man. The man must marry the woman.
Who will kiss? When do eyes get opened?
The museum gives out free breath mints.
For the pointer I thank the excellent Daniel Lippman.
A Spontaneous Order Firm
Valve’s Chief Economist tries to explain the Valve Model:
A corporation that tries to function as a type of ‘spontaneous order’ (i.e. without an internal system of command/hierarchy) seems like a contradiction in terms. Smith’s and Hayek’s spontaneous orders turn on price signals. As Coase et al explained in the previous section, the whole point about a corporation is that its internal organisation cannot turn on price signals (for if it could, it would not exist as a corporation but would, instead, contract out all the goods and services internally produced). So, if Valve’s own spontaneous order does not turn on price signals, what does it turn on?
The answer is: on time and team allocations. Each employee chooses (a) her partners (or team with which she wants to work) and (b) how much time she wants to devote to various competing projects. In making this decision, each Valve employee takes into account not only the attractiveness of projects and teams competing for their time but, also, the decisions of others. The reason is that, especially when insufficiently informed about projects and teams (e.g. when an employee has recently joined Valve), an employee can gather much useful information about projects and teams simple by observing how popular different projects and teams are (a) with others in general, (b) with others whose interests/talents are closer to their own.
Just like in a marketplace, everything in Valve is in flux. People move about (making use of their desk’s wheels), new teams are formed, new projects are concocted. All this information is observable by the naked eye (one notices an empty spot where David’s desk used to be, and then finds out that David moved to the 4th floor to work with Tom, Dick and Harriet), on the company’s intranet, in cross-team meetings where teams inform each other on what they are working on). People learn constantly, both by observing and by doing, the value to them of different projects and teams. These subjective values keep changing, as the time and team formation signals that are emitted by everyone else are updated.
The idea here is that, through this ever-evolving process, people’s capacities, talents and ideas are given the best chance possible to develop and produce synergies that promote the Common Good. It is as if an invisible hand guides Valve’s individual members to decisions that both unleash each person’s potential and serve the company’s collective interest (which does not necessarily coincide with profit maximisation).
It’s an interesting post, much longer than I have quoted here, although no evidence is given that the time allocation system works anything like an invisible hand–a few good games do not a social revolution make.
Coase’s islands of conscious decision are also often misunderstood. The islands are not cut off from the market sea but are permeated by the sea. Everything that goes on within the firm does so in light of the shadow prices projected from outside. Absent those prices the firm fails into socialist miscalculation.
Still, there is something to be said for how modern technology can coordinate mass action. The phenomena is perhaps most evident in the way that distributed computing coordinates the actions of thousands of computers to solve various problems, each day and each hour drawing on a different set of computers. Coordinating people in this way allows them to quickly participate in joint actions, such as a flash mob. (See also anonymous). Indeed, silicon Valley writ large is not that different from internal Valve, people end and form new firms all the time.
Capitalism allows within itself many alternative social arrangements, to think, however, that one particular such arrangement is the one that must govern the whole is badly to miss the point.
Can you pass this Turing test?
What did they think about the weather that morning?
Three different responses came from a male human, a female human and a machine. Which is which? Keep in mind that the event was held in October 2008 and they all knew it was autumn/fall in England. The responses were:
A.”I do tend to like a nice foggy morning, as it adds a certain mystery.”
B. “Not the best, expecting pirates to come out of the fog.”
C. “The weather is not nice at the moment, unless you like fog.”
So which is which?
That is from a paper by Kevin Warwick, “Not Another Look at the Turing Test.” I will offer the answer when I get back home. For the pointer I thank Michelle Dawson.
Econ Memes
Art Carden has created a page of econ-related memes. Here is one of my favorites:
The pivot, across the Atlantic
Euro-zone countries would still have to guarantee the loans their banks receive from the region’s permanent bailout fund, the European Stability Mechanism, even if it directly recapitalizes them, a senior European Union official with direct knowledge of the situation said.
The remarks Friday cast doubt on what was seen as a breakthrough at a euro-zone leaders’ meeting last week, where it was decided that once a central euro-zone bank supervisor was in place, the ESM would be able to directly recapitalize banks.
“I need to make clear what the ESM can do: The ESM is able… to take an equity share in a bank. But only against full guarantee by the sovereign concerned,” the official said. He added that while the member state’s guarantee wouldn’t directly show on the government’s official debt burden, the loan “remains the risk of the sovereign.”
Here is more, from the excellent Matina Stevis, and I suspect next time the markets won’t be tricked so readily. Not good.
The pivot
…since the Supreme Court upheld the Democrats’ 2010 health care law, Republicans, led by Mitt Romney, have reversed tactics and attacked the president and Democrats in Congress by saying that Medicare will be cut too much as part of that law. Republicans plan to hold another vote to repeal the law in the House next week, though any such measure would die in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
“Obamacare cuts Medicare — cuts Medicare — by approximately $500 billion,” Mr. Romney has told audiences.
I have been predicting this. There is more here. Paul Ryan offered this account:
Mr. Ryan, of Wisconsin, was unavailable for comment, but, pressed on the issue on ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, he said: “Well, our budget keeps that money for Medicare to extend its solvency. What Obamacare does is it takes that money from Medicare to spend on Obamacare.”
The countercyclical asset? (a continuing series)
Highly speculative, but fun to think about:
Four separate experiments, along with real-world data, all say yes. Our findings consistently supported the lipstick effect, as college-age women, when primed with news of economic instability, reported an increased desire to buy attractiveness-enhancing goods, along with a decreased desire to purchase goods that do not enhance one’s physical appearance. Our experiments also found that this increased desire for beauty products, clothing and accessories was fully mediated by a heightened preference for mates with resources.
While many journalists who have written about the lipstick effect have theorized that it represents women’s therapeutic spending on cheap indulgences, we found that the lipstick effect applies specifically to products that enhance beauty, even when those products are more expensive. Recession cues increased women’s desire to buy high-end cosmetics and designer clothing, but not to buy budget-line beauty products, which were rated less effective at improving one’s appearance.
Furthermore, we discovered that the lipstick effect and a woman’s desire to attract a mate with resources are unrelated to her independent resource access. Women of both higher and lower socioeconomic status expressed an increased desire to buy luxury beauty products when primed with recession cues. This suggests that an uncertain economic climate leads women to heighten mate attraction effort irrespective of their own resource need.
The story is here, and I thank VS for the pointer.
A visual illusion
If it is this easy to be mistaken about simple things it must be much easier to be mistaken about difficult things. From Geekolinks.
*Economic Fables*, the new Ariel Rubinstein book
It is summarized here:
I had the good fortune to grow up in a wonderful area of Jerusalem, surrounded by a diverse range of people: Rabbi Meizel, the communist Sala Marcel, my widowed Aunt Hannah, and the intellectual Yaacovson. As far as I’m concerned, the opinion of such people is just as authoritative for making social and economic decisions as the opinion of an expert using a model.
Part memoir, part crash-course in economic theory, this deeply engaging book by one of the world’s foremost economists looks at economic ideas through a personal lens. Together with an introduction to some of the central concepts in modern economic thought, Ariel Rubinstein offers some powerful and entertaining reflections on his childhood, family and career. In doing so, he challenges many of the central tenets of game theory, and sheds light on the role economics can play in society at large.
Economic Fables is as thought-provoking for seasoned economists as it is enlightening for newcomers to the field.
The book can be read freely here. Rubinstein’s home page is here.
Why do humans play chess in such a risk-averse manner?
Today I ask why computers playing among themselves have produced livelier games than recent matches of humans equipped with computer preparation.
That is from Kenneth Regan, much more at the link. And here is part of his answer:
The reason may literally be that the computers have greater contempt for each other. The contempt factor is a term in a program’s evaluation function that makes it pretend to be a couple tenths of a pawn better off than it is, in situations where a drawing or drawish continuation is available.
The computers also have no awareness of high stakes that puts “staying in the game” ahead of maximizing one’s chance of winning.
The context of course, is the recent Anand-Gelfand world chess championship match, which featured unprecedented levels of computer preparation, and, arguably, a lot of very boring games of “theoretical interest” only.
So will iPhones make us all more boring?