Computable Rationality, NUTS, and the Nuclear Leviathan

This paper explores how the Leviathan that projects power through nuclear arms exercises a unique nuclearized sovereignty. In the case of nuclear superpowers, this sovereignty extends to wielding the power to destroy human civilization as we know it across the globe. Nuclearized sovereignty depends on a hybrid form of power encompassing human decision-makers in a hierarchical chain of command, and all of the technical and computerized functions necessary to maintain command and control at every moment of the sovereign's existence: this sovereign power cannot sleep. This article analyzes how the form of rationality that informs this hybrid exercise of power historically developed to be computable. By definition, computable rationality must be able to function without any intelligible grasp of the context or the comprehensive significance of decision-making outcomes. Thus, maintaining nuclearized sovereignty necessarily must be able to execute momentous life and death decisions without the type of sentience we usually associate with ethical individual and collective decisions

Computational rationality and voluntary provision of public goods: an agent-based simulation model

The issue of the cooperation among private agents in realising collective goods has always raised problems concerning the basic nature of individual behaviour as well as the more traditional economic problems. The Computational Economics literature on public goods provision can be useful to study the possibility of cooperation under alternative sets of assumptions concerning the nature of individual rationality and the kind of interactions between individuals. In this work I will use an agent-based simulation model to study the evolution of cooperation among private agents taking part in a collective project: a high number of agents, characterised by computational rationality, defined as the capacity to calculate and evaluate their own immediate payoffs perfectly and without errors, interact to producing a public good. The results show that when the agents’ behaviour is not influenced either by expectations of others’ behaviour or by social and relational characteristics, they opt to contribute to the public good to an almost socially optimal extent, even where there is no big difference between the rates of return on the private and the public investment.Computational Economics; Agent-based models; Social Dilemmas; Collective Action; Public Goods

Evolutionary Game Theory

Articl

Behavioural Economics: Classical and Modern

In this paper, the origins and development of behavioural economics, beginning with the pioneering works of Herbert Simon (1953) and Ward Edwards (1954), is traced, described and (critically) discussed, in some detail. Two kinds of behavioural economics – classical and modern – are attributed, respectively, to the two pioneers. The mathematical foundations of classical behavioural economics is identified, largely, to be in the theory of computation and computational complexity; the corresponding mathematical basis for modern behavioural economics is, on the other hand, claimed to be a notion of subjective probability (at least at its origins in the works of Ward Edwards). The economic theories of behavior, challenging various aspects of 'orthodox' theory, were decisively influenced by these two mathematical underpinnings of the two theoriesClassical Behavioural Economics, Modern Behavioural Economics, Subjective Probability, Model of Computation, Computational Complexity. Subjective Expected Utility

Game Theory and Economic Behavior

Until the beginning of 1950s, the economic theory in general, and the microeconomic theory in particular, relied totally on the deterministic character of economic phenomena. Nowadays microeconomic models are built on uncertain elements in a competitive environment that is affected by risk and uncertainty. Two centuries later, traditional microeconomics, also known as derived microeconomics, continues to be based on Adam Smith’s theory. As individuals are interested in participating in commercial transactions, but for these to take place effectively, two essential principles should be observed: the principle of rationality and the principle of pure and perfect competition. The link between Brower’ fixed point theorems on the one hand and John von Neumann’s minimax theorem on the other hand enabled other authors such as McKenzie Arrow and Debreu Uzawa to state and demonstrate simpler but more general theorems than that of Abraham Wald. It was thus supposed that consumer preferences in a pool of possible consumptions are reflexive, transitive and all are comparable. Using game theory as a reference framework to represent the behavior of economic agents, microeconomics strongly renews its scope of investigation. The problem that arises is no longer linked to the study of perfectly competitive markets, but mostly to how agents coordinate their decisions in different strategic configuration circumstances. The use of such concepts as risk, antiselection or coordination limits has opened new scopes to economy in general and to microeconomics in particular.Game Theory, behavior of economic, traditional microeconomics, new microeconomics

Game Networks

We introduce Game networks (G nets), a novel representation for multi-agent decision problems. Compared to other game-theoretic representations, such as strategic or extensive forms, G nets are more structured and more compact; more fundamentally, G nets constitute a computationally advantageous framework for strategic inference, as both probability and utility independencies are captured in the structure of the network and can be exploited in order to simplify the inference process. An important aspect of multi-agent reasoning is the identification of some or all of the strategic equilibria in a game; we present original convergence methods for strategic equilibrium which can take advantage of strategic separabilities in the G net structure in order to simplify the computations. Specifically, we describe a method which identifies a unique equilibrium as a function of the game payoffs, and one which identifies all equilibria.Comment: Appears in Proceedings of the Sixteenth Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI2000

The imperfect hiding : some introductory concepts and preliminary issues on modularity

In this work we present a critical assessment of some problems and open questions on the debated notion of modularity. Modularity is greatly in fashion nowadays, being often proposed as the new approach to complex artefact production that enables to combine fast innovation pace, enhanced product variety and reduced need for co-ordination. In line with recent critical assessments of the managerial literature on modularity, we sustain that modularity is only one among several arrangements to cope with the complexity inherent in most high-technology artefact production, and by no means the best one. We first discuss relations between modularity and the broader (and much older within economics) notion of division of labour. Then we sustain that a modular approach to labour division aimed at eliminating technological interdependencies between components or phases of a complex production process may have, as a by-product, the creation of other types of interdependencies which may subsequently result in inefficiencies of various types. Hence, the choice of a modular design strategy implies the resolution of various tradeoffs. Depending on how such tradeoffs are solved, different organisational arrangements may be created to cope with ‘residual’ interdependencies. Hence, there is no need to postulate a perfect isomorphism, as some recent literature has proposed, between modularity at the product level and modularity at the organisational level