Beyond myopic best response (in Cournot competition)

A Nash Equilibrium is a joint strategy profile at which each agent myopically plays a best response to the other agents' strategies, ignoring the possibility that deviating from the equilibrium could lead to an avalanche of successive changes by other agents. However, such changes could potentially be beneficial to the agent, creating incentive to act non-myopically, so as to take advantage of others' responses. To study this phenomenon, we consider a non-myopic Cournot competition, where each firm selects whether it wants to maximize profit (as in the classical Cournot competition) or to maximize revenue (by masquerading as a firm with zero production costs). The key observation is that profit may actually be higher when acting to maximize revenue, (1) which will depress market prices, (2) which will reduce the production of other firms, (3) which will gain market share for the revenue maximizing firm, (4) which will, overall, increase profits for the revenue maximizing firm. Implicit in this line of thought is that one might take other firms' responses into account when choosing a market strategy. The Nash Equilibria of the non-myopic Cournot competition capture this action/response issue appropriately, and this work is a step towards understanding the impact of such strategic manipulative play in markets. We study the properties of Nash Equilibria of non-myopic Cournot competition with linear demand functions and show existence of pure Nash Equilibria, that simple best response dynamics will produce such an equilibrium, and that for some natural dynamics this convergence is within linear time. This is in contrast to the well known fact that best response dynamics need not converge in the standard myopic Cournot competition. Furthermore, we compare the outcome of the non-myopic Cournot competition with that of the standard myopic Cournot competition. Not surprisingly, perhaps, prices in the non-myopic game are lower and the firms, in total, produce more and have a lower aggregate utility

Reporting and appraising the context, process and impact of PPI on contributors, researchers and the trial during a randomised controlled trial - the 3D study

Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) is believed to enhance health care delivery research, and is widely required in research proposals. Detailed, standardised reporting of PPI is needed so that strategies to implement more than token PPI that achieves impact can be identified, properly evaluated and reproduced. Impact includes effects on the research, PPI contributors and researchers. Using contributor and researcher perspectives and drawing on published guidelines for reporting PPI, we aimed to reflect on our experience and contribute evidence relevant to two important questions: ‘What difference does PPI make?’ and ‘What’s the best way to do it?’ Methods Fourteen people living with multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity) were PPI contributors to a randomised controlled trial to improve care for people with multimorbidity. Meetings took place approximately four times a year throughout the trial, beginning at grant application stage. Meeting notes were recorded and a log of PPI involvement was kept. At the end of the trial, seven PPI contributors and four researchers completed free-text questionnaires about their experience of PPI involvement and their perception of PPI impact. The responses were analysed thematically by two PPI contributors and one researcher. The PPI group proposed writing this report, which was co-authored by three PPI contributors and two researchers. Results Meeting attendance averaged nine PPI contributors and three to four researchers. The involvement log and meeting notes recorded a wide range of activities and impact including changes to participant documentation, advice on qualitative data collection, contribution to data analysis and dissemination advice. Three themes were identified from the questionnaires: impact on the study, including keeping the research grounded in patient experience; impact on individuals, including learning from group diversity and feeling valued; and an environment that facilitated participation. The size of the group influenced impact. Researchers and PPI contributors described a rewarding interaction that benefitted them and the research. Conclusions PPI was wide-ranging and had impact on the trial, contributors and researchers. The group environment facilitated involvement. Feedback and group interactions benefitted individuals. The insights gained from this study will positively influence the researchers’ and contributors’ future involvement with PPI

Characterizing preclinical sub-phenotypic models of acute respiratory distress syndrome:An experimental ovine study

Abstract The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) describes a heterogenous population of patients with acute severe respiratory failure. However, contemporary advances have begun to identify distinct sub‐phenotypes that exist within its broader envelope. These sub‐phenotypes have varied outcomes and respond differently to several previously studied interventions. A more precise understanding of their pathobiology and an ability to prospectively identify them, may allow for the development of precision therapies in ARDS. Historically, animal models have played a key role in translational research, although few studies have so far assessed either the ability of animal models to replicate these sub‐phenotypes or investigated the presence of sub‐phenotypes within animal models. Here, in three ovine models of ARDS, using combinations of oleic acid and intravenous, or intratracheal lipopolysaccharide, we investigated the presence of sub‐phenotypes which qualitatively resemble those found in clinical cohorts. Principal Component Analysis and partitional clustering identified two clusters, differentiated by markers of shock, inflammation, and lung injury. This study provides a first exploration of ARDS phenotypes in preclinical models and suggests a methodology for investigating this phenomenon in future studies

Combined Mesenchymal Stromal Cell Therapy and ECMO in ARDS:A Controlled Experimental Study in Sheep

Rationale: Mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) therapy is a promising intervention for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), although trials to date have not investigated its use alongside extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Recent preclinical studies have suggested that combining these interventions may attenuate the efficacy of ECMO. Objectives: To determine the safety and efficacy of MSC therapy in a model of ARDS and ECMO. Methods: ARDS was induced in 14 sheep, after which they were established on venovenous ECMO. Subsequently, they received either endobronchial induced pluripotent stem cell-derived human MSCs (hMSCs) (n = 7) or cell-free carrier vehicle (vehicle control; n = 7). During ECMO, a low VT ventilation strategy was employed in addition to protocolized hemodynamic support. Animals were monitored and supported for 24 hours. Lung tissue, bronchoalveolar fluid, and plasma were analyzed, in addition to continuous respiratory and hemodynamic monitoring. Measurements and Main Results: The administration of hMSCs did not improve oxygenation (PaO2/FIO2 mean difference =2146mmHg; P= 0.076) or pulmonary function.However, histological evidence of lung injury(lung injuryscoremeandifference=20.07;P=0.04) and BALIL-8 were reduced. In addition, hMSC-treated animals had a significantly lower cumulative requirement for vasopressor. Despite endobronchial administration, animals treated with hMSCs had a significant elevation in transmembrane oxygenator pressure gradients. Thiswas accompanied by more pulmonary artery thromboses and adherent hMSCs found on explanted oxygenator fibers. Conclusions: Endobronchial hMSC therapy in an ovine model of ARDS and ECMO can impair membrane oxygenator function and does not improve oxygenation. These data do not recommend the safe use of hMSCs during venovenous ECMO. </p

Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance

Automation is often problematic because people fail to rely upon it appropriately. Because people respond to technology socially, trust influences reliance on automation. In particular, trust guides reliance when complexity and unanticipated situations make a complete understanding of the automation impractical. This review considers trust from the organizational, sociological, interpersonal, psychological, and neurological perspectives. It considers how the context, automation characteristics, and cognitive processes affect the appropriateness of trust. The context in which the automation is used influences automation performance and provides a goal-oriented perspective to assess automation characteristics along a dimension of attributional abstraction. These characteristics can influence trust through analytic, analogical, and affective processes. The challenges of extrapolating the concept of trust in people to trust in automation are discussed. A conceptual model integrates research regarding trust in automation and describes the dynamics of trust, the role of context, and the influence of display characteristics. Actual or potential applications of this research include improved designs of systems that require people to manage imperfect automation