pith. sign in

arxiv: 2506.23734 · v2 · submitted 2025-06-30 · 💻 cs.NE · cs.AI· cs.GT

Governing Strategic Dynamics: Equilibrium Stabilization via Divergence-Driven Control

Hao Shi , Xi Li , Fangfang Xie This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 07:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NE cs.AIcs.GT
keywords marker gene methodblack-box coevolutionmixed-motive gamesequilibrium stabilizationevolution strategiescooperation recoverynon-stationarity
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Marker Gene Method anchors evaluations to cross-generational markers and uses divergence-driven updates to stabilize black-box coevolution in mixed-motive games.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes the Marker Gene Method to address instability caused by opponent drift and noisy evaluations in coevolutionary algorithms for mixed-motive settings. It anchors fitness signals to stable marker individuals from prior generations while applying conservative update rules and a divergence-based threshold adjustment via natural gradients. Experiments integrate the method with evolution strategies to test coordination recovery in classic games and a resource-depletion task. Results show near-perfect final cooperation rates in Stag Hunt and Battle of the Sexes plus high stable cooperation across resource states, with little hyperparameter retuning needed. This governance layer improves training stability without modifying the base optimizer.

Core claim

MGM-E-NES reliably recovers target coordination in Stag Hunt and Battle of the Sexes, achieving final cooperation probabilities close to (1,1) (e.g., 0.991±0.01/1.00±0.00 and 0.97±0.00/0.97±0.00 for the two players). In the Markov resource game, it maintains high and stable state-conditioned cooperation across 30 seeds, with final cooperation of ≈0.954/0.980/0.916 in Rich/Poor/Collapsed (both players; small standard deviations), indicating welfare-aligned and state-dependent behavior.

What carries the argument

The Marker Gene Method (MGM) anchors evaluation to cross-generational marker individuals together with DWAM and conservative marker-update rules, while NGD-Div adapts the update threshold using a divergence proxy and natural-gradient optimization.

Load-bearing premise

Anchoring evaluation to cross-generational marker individuals combined with conservative update rules provides a stable and non-spurious progress signal without introducing new biases in mixed-motive settings.

What would settle it

Running MGM-E-NES on Stag Hunt for multiple independent trials and finding average cooperation probabilities below 0.8 for either player after training would show the method fails to recover the target equilibrium.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23734 by Fangfang Xie, Hao Shi, Xi Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: This figure illustrates the impact of the dynamic weight adjustment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Convergence to the Nash Equilibrium (NE) in RPS, measured by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: This figure shows (a) the evolution of average fitness for Pop1 and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Performance of MGM-RMOEA\D and CR-MOEA\D on ZDT-2 MGM-RMOEAD C-RMOEAD 0.37 0.38 0.39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.48 HV HV ZDT-2 (a) (b) (c) (d) MGM-RMOEAD C-RMOEAD 0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 SP SPACING MGM-RMOEAD C-RMOEAD 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 Severity Disturbance Severity Comparison MGM Under CR CR Under MGM 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 Degardation Value Performance Deg… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of robust multi-objective optimization performance and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Box plot of performance degradation about ZDT-2(single run). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Illustration of redundant learning cycles resulting from the decay of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Convergence on the Pathological Shapley Biased Game. Performance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Validation of the dual role of the Memory Pool (MP) mechanism in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Black-box coevolution in mixed-motive games is often undermined by opponent-drift non-stationarity and noisy rollouts, which distort progress signals and can induce cycling, Red-Queen dynamics, and detachment. We propose the \emph{Marker Gene Method} (MGM), a curriculum-inspired governance mechanism that stabilizes selection by anchoring evaluation to cross-generational marker individuals, together with DWAM and conservative marker-update rules to reduce spurious updates. We also introduce NGD-Div, which adapts the key update threshold using a divergence proxy and natural-gradient optimization. We provide theoretical analysis in strictly competitive settings and evaluate MGM integrated with evolution strategies (MGM-E-NES) on coordination games and a resource-depletion Markov game. MGM-E-NES reliably recovers target coordination in Stag Hunt and Battle of the Sexes, achieving final cooperation probabilities close to $(1,1)$ (e.g., $0.991\pm0.01/1.00\pm0.00$ and $0.97\pm0.00/0.97\pm0.00$ for the two players). In the Markov resource game, it maintains high and stable state-conditioned cooperation across 30 seeds, with final cooperation of $\approx 0.954/0.980/0.916$ in \textsc{Rich}/\textsc{Poor}/\textsc{Collapsed} (both players; small standard deviations), indicating welfare-aligned and state-dependent behavior. Overall, MGM-E-NES transfers across tasks with minimal hyperparameter changes and yields consistently stable training dynamics, showing that top-level governance can substantially improve the robustness of black-box coevolution in dynamic environments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes the Marker Gene Method (MGM) as a curriculum-inspired governance mechanism to stabilize black-box coevolution in mixed-motive games by anchoring evaluation to cross-generational marker individuals, together with DWAM and conservative marker-update rules to reduce spurious updates. It introduces NGD-Div to adapt the update threshold using a divergence proxy and natural-gradient optimization. Theoretical analysis is provided in strictly competitive settings, while empirical evaluation of MGM integrated with evolution strategies (MGM-E-NES) on Stag Hunt, Battle of the Sexes, and a Markov resource-depletion game reports high and stable cooperation probabilities near (1,1) with small standard deviations across 30 seeds (e.g., final values of approximately 0.991/1.00, 0.97/0.97, and state-conditioned 0.954/0.980/0.916).

Significance. If the results hold, the work offers a practical top-level governance approach that could substantially improve the robustness of evolutionary strategies in non-stationary mixed-motive environments by mitigating opponent-drift and cycling issues. The reported transfer across tasks with minimal hyperparameter changes and consistently stable dynamics represent a potential strength for applications in coordination and resource games.

major comments (2)
  1. [Theoretical Analysis] The theoretical analysis is restricted to strictly competitive settings, yet the headline empirical results and strongest claims concern mixed-motive coordination in Stag Hunt, Battle of the Sexes, and the Markov resource game. Without an explicit extension or justification for transfer, the stabilization mechanism (marker anchoring plus conservative updates) lacks a guarantee against introducing new biases under mixed motives, leaving the attribution of low-variance outcomes (e.g., 0.991±0.01) unanchored.
  2. [Empirical Evaluation] The evaluation lacks details on implementation, hyperparameter sensitivity analysis, and the full derivation of the divergence proxy, which are necessary to assess whether the conservative marker-update rules and cross-generational anchoring provide a non-spurious progress signal in mixed-motive settings.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from explicitly noting the scope mismatch between the competitive-only theory and the mixed-motive experiments to prevent misinterpretation of the generality of the claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments and the recommendation for major revision. We address each major comment below, providing clarifications and outlining the revisions we will make to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Theoretical Analysis] The theoretical analysis is restricted to strictly competitive settings, yet the headline empirical results and strongest claims concern mixed-motive coordination in Stag Hunt, Battle of the Sexes, and the Markov resource game. Without an explicit extension or justification for transfer, the stabilization mechanism (marker anchoring plus conservative updates) lacks a guarantee against introducing new biases under mixed motives, leaving the attribution of low-variance outcomes (e.g., 0.991±0.01) unanchored.

    Authors: We acknowledge that our theoretical analysis focuses on strictly competitive settings to establish foundational properties of the marker anchoring and conservative update rules in a setting where opponent behavior is directly adversarial. However, the core issues addressed by MGM—opponent-drift non-stationarity and noisy progress signals—are general to coevolutionary dynamics and particularly acute in mixed-motive games. The mechanism does not rely on assumptions unique to zero-sum interactions; instead, it uses cross-generational markers as stable evaluation anchors and divergence-driven thresholds to filter spurious updates, which should mitigate cycling and drift regardless of the payoff structure. Our empirical results across multiple mixed-motive tasks show consistently low variance and high cooperation levels, suggesting the mechanism does not introduce new biases but rather stabilizes selection. To address the referee's concern directly, we will revise the manuscript to include an explicit justification subsection explaining the transferability, supported by the design principles and empirical evidence. A complete theoretical extension to general-sum games is beyond the current scope but represents valuable future work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Empirical Evaluation] The evaluation lacks details on implementation, hyperparameter sensitivity analysis, and the full derivation of the divergence proxy, which are necessary to assess whether the conservative marker-update rules and cross-generational anchoring provide a non-spurious progress signal in mixed-motive settings.

    Authors: We agree that additional details are necessary for reproducibility and to substantiate the claims. In the revised version, we will expand the empirical evaluation section to include: comprehensive implementation details and pseudocode for MGM-E-NES; a hyperparameter sensitivity study varying key parameters such as the marker update frequency, divergence threshold, and DWAM factors, demonstrating robustness; and the complete mathematical derivation of the NGD-Div proxy, including the natural gradient computation and its role in adapting the update threshold based on population divergence. These additions will clarify how the conservative rules ensure non-spurious signals by comparing evaluations against stable markers rather than transient opponents. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: method and results presented as independent empirical evaluation

full rationale

The paper defines MGM via anchoring to cross-generational markers plus DWAM and conservative updates, supplies a separate theoretical analysis restricted to strictly competitive settings, and reports empirical outcomes on Stag Hunt, Battle of the Sexes, and the Markov resource game. No equation or step is shown to reduce a claimed prediction or stabilization result to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction; the reported cooperation probabilities (e.g., 0.991±0.01) and low standard deviations across 30 seeds are presented as measured evaluation outcomes rather than quantities forced by the same data used to tune the markers. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against the external benchmarks of the coordination games.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on the effectiveness of marker anchoring and conservative updates, which are introduced without external benchmarks or formal proofs beyond the stated competitive-setting analysis.

free parameters (2)
  • marker-update threshold
    Conservative rules for updating markers are described but not specified as fixed or derived; likely tuned per task.
  • divergence proxy scaling
    NGD-Div adapts the update threshold using a divergence proxy whose exact parameterization is not detailed.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Theoretical analysis in strictly competitive settings extends to mixed-motive games
    Paper states analysis is provided in strictly competitive settings while evaluating on mixed-motive tasks.
invented entities (2)
  • Marker Gene Method (MGM) no independent evidence
    purpose: Anchor evaluation to cross-generational individuals to stabilize selection
    New governance mechanism introduced to address opponent-drift non-stationarity.
  • NGD-Div no independent evidence
    purpose: Adapt update threshold using divergence proxy and natural-gradient optimization
    New adaptation rule for reducing spurious updates.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5831 in / 1307 out tokens · 35064 ms · 2026-05-19T07:40:42.963981+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. H. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems. MIT Press, 1992

    work page 1992

  2. [2]

    A review on genetic algorithm: past, present, and future,

    S. Katoch, S. S. Chauhan, and V . Kumar, “A review on genetic algorithm: past, present, and future,” Multimedia Tools and Applications, pp. 8091– 8126, Feb. 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Co-evolving parasites improve simulated evolution as an optimization procedure,

    W. D. Hillis, “Co-evolving parasites improve simulated evolution as an optimization procedure,” Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena , pp. 228– 234, May 1990

    work page 1990

  4. [4]

    A systematic review of coevolution in real-time strategy games,

    E. Elfeky, S. Elsayed, L. Marsh, D. Essam, M. Cochrane, B. Sims, and R. Sarker, “A systematic review of coevolution in real-time strategy games,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, p. 136647–136665, Jan 2021

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Coevolving defender strategies within adversarial ground station transit time games via competitive coevolution,

    M. Indaco, S. N. Harris, D. Seals, S. Mulder, D. R. Tauritz, and D. Guzzetti, “Coevolving defender strategies within adversarial ground station transit time games via competitive coevolution,” The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences , vol. 70, no. 6, Nov. 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Coevolutionary algorithm for evolving competitive strategies in the weapon target assignment problem,

    E. Elfeky et al. , “Coevolutionary algorithm for evolving competitive strategies in the weapon target assignment problem,” in Proceedings of the 2022 6th International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Meta- heuristics & Swarm Intelligence , Apr. 2022, pp. 9–18

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Behaviour discovery in real-time strategy games using cooperative co-evolution with dynamic binary tree decomposition,

    L. Kelly, M. Masek, and C. Lam, “Behaviour discovery in real-time strategy games using cooperative co-evolution with dynamic binary tree decomposition,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion , Jul. 2024, pp. 287–290

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Evolvingbehavior: Towards co-creative evolution of behavior trees for game npcs,

    N. Partlan, L. Soto, J. Howe, S. Shrivastava, M. El-Nasr, and S. Marsella, “Evolvingbehavior: Towards co-creative evolution of behavior trees for game npcs,” in Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games , Sep. 2022, pp. 1–13

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Yao and S

    X. Yao and S. Chong, Coevolutionary Computation and Its Applications. Springer, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Deploying synthetic coevolution and machine learning to engineer protein-protein interactions,

    A. Yang et al., “Deploying synthetic coevolution and machine learning to engineer protein-protein interactions,” Science, vol. 381, no. 6656, Jul. 2023

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Evolving be- haviour trees for swarm robotics,

    S. Jones, M. Studley, S. Hauert, and A. Winfield, “Evolving be- haviour trees for swarm robotics,” in Springer Proceedings in Advanced Robotics. Springer, 2018, pp. 487–501

    work page 2018

  12. [12]

    Environment driven dynamic decomposition for cooperative coevolution of multi-agent systems,

    L. Kelly, M. Masek, and C.-P. Lam, “Environment driven dynamic decomposition for cooperative coevolution of multi-agent systems,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference , Jul. 2022

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    Global progress in competitive co-evolution: a systematic comparison of alternative methods,

    S. Nolfi and P. Pagliuca, “Global progress in competitive co-evolution: a systematic comparison of alternative methods,” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 11, Jan. 2025

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    A novel evolutionary algorithm for dynamic constrained multiobjective optimization problems,

    Q. Chen, J. Ding, S. Yang, and T. Chai, “A novel evolutionary algorithm for dynamic constrained multiobjective optimization problems,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 792–806, Aug. 2020

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Some topics in two-person games,

    L. S. Shapley, “Some topics in two-person games,” in Advances in Game Theory, ser. Annals of Mathematics Studies, M. Dresher, L. S. Shapley, and A. W. Tucker, Eds. Princeton University Press, 1964, vol. 52, pp. 1–29

    work page 1964

  16. [16]

    A survey on cooperative co-evolutionary algorithms,

    X. Ma et al. , “A survey on cooperative co-evolutionary algorithms,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation , vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 421–441, Jun. 2019

    work page 2019

  17. [17]

    Coevolutionary multiobjective evo- lutionary algorithms: Survey of the state-of-the-art,

    L. Antonio and C. A. C. Coello, “Coevolutionary multiobjective evo- lutionary algorithms: Survey of the state-of-the-art,” IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation , vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 851–865, Dec. 2018

    work page 2018

  18. [18]

    A co-evolutionary genetic algorithm based on improved k-means clustering,

    W. Xia, L. Shi, R. Zhang, J. Zhang, and J. Zhao, “A co-evolutionary genetic algorithm based on improved k-means clustering,” in 2023 8th International Conference on Image, Vision and Computing (ICIVC), Jul. 2023, pp. 813–818

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Coevolutionary algorithm for building robust decision trees under minimax regret,

    A. ˙Zychowski, A. Perrault, and J. Ma ´ndziuk, “Coevolutionary algorithm for building robust decision trees under minimax regret,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , vol. 38, no. 19, Mar. 2024, pp. 21 869–21 877

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Competitive coevolutionary algorithm for robust multi-objective optimization: The worst case minimization,

    I. R. Meneghini, F. G. Guimaraes, and A. Gaspar-Cunha, “Competitive coevolutionary algorithm for robust multi-objective optimization: The worst case minimization,” in 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), Jul. 2016, pp. 586–593

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Competitive co-evolutionary algorithm for constrained robust design,

    M. Li, F. Guimar ˜aes, and D. A. Lowther, “Competitive co-evolutionary algorithm for constrained robust design,” IET Science, Measurement & Technology, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 218–223, Mar. 2015

    work page 2015

  22. [22]

    A new robust domi- nance criterion for multiobjective optimization,

    M. Li, R. Silva, F. Guimaraes, and D. Lowther, “A new robust domi- nance criterion for multiobjective optimization,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, pp. 1–4, Mar. 2015

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    Eco-evolutionary red queen dynamics regulate biodiversity in a metabolite-driven microbial system,

    J. A. Bonachela, M. T. Wortel, and N. C. Stenseth, “Eco-evolutionary red queen dynamics regulate biodiversity in a metabolite-driven microbial system,” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 1, Dec. 2017

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Tracking the red queen: Measurements of adaptive progress in co-evolutionary simulations,

    D. Cliff and G. F. Miller, “Tracking the red queen: Measurements of adaptive progress in co-evolutionary simulations,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Advances in Artificial Life . Springer, 1995, pp. 200–218

    work page 1995

  25. [25]

    Revisiting leigh van valen’s “a new evolutionary law

    R. Sol ´e, “Revisiting leigh van valen’s “a new evolutionary law” (1973),” Biological Theory, vol. 17, no. 2, p. 120–125, Jun 2022

    work page 1973

  26. [26]

    Combating coevolutionary disengagement by reducing parasite virulence,

    J. Cartlidge and S. Bullock, “Combating coevolutionary disengagement by reducing parasite virulence,” Evolutionary Computation , vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 193–222, Jun. 2004

    work page 2004

  27. [27]

    Addressing expensive multi-objective games with postponed preference articulation via memetic co-evolution,

    A. ˙Zychowski, A. Gupta, J. Ma ´ndziuk, and Y . S. Ong, “Addressing expensive multi-objective games with postponed preference articulation via memetic co-evolution,” Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 154, pp. 17– 31, Aug. 2018

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Competitive coevolution for defense and security: Elo-based similar-strength opponent sampling,

    S. N. Harris and D. R. Tauritz, “Competitive coevolution for defense and security: Elo-based similar-strength opponent sampling,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion , Jul. 2021, pp. 1898–1906

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Jong, Intransitivity in Coevolution , Jan 2004, p

    E. Jong, Intransitivity in Coevolution , Jan 2004, p. 843–851

    work page 2004

  30. [30]

    Pathologies and analysis in coevolutionary search,

    X. Yao and S. Chong, “Pathologies and analysis in coevolutionary search,” in Natural Computing Series . Springer, 2025, pp. 127–149

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    Coevolutionary intransitivity in games: A landscape analy- sis,

    H. Richter, “Coevolutionary intransitivity in games: A landscape analy- sis,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science . Springer, 2015, pp. 869– 881

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    Coevolving predator and prey robots: Do ‘arms races’ arise in artificial evolution?

    S. Nolfi and D. Floreano, “Coevolving predator and prey robots: Do ‘arms races’ arise in artificial evolution?” Artificial Life, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 311–335, Oct. 1998

    work page 1998

  33. [33]

    Cyclic dominance in evolutionary games: a review,

    A. Szolnoki, M. Mobilia, L.-L. Jiang, B. Szczesny, A. M. Rucklidge, and M. Perc, “Cyclic dominance in evolutionary games: a review,” Journal of The Royal Society Interface , vol. 11, no. 100, p. 20140735, Nov. 2014

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    Complexity and sustainability: From system dynam- ics to coevolutionary spacetimes,

    R. A. P. Perdig ˜ao, “Complexity and sustainability: From system dynam- ics to coevolutionary spacetimes,” in Designing Environments, Introduc- tion to Designing Environments . Springer, 2023, pp. 11–32

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Runtime analysis of a co-evolutionary algorithm,

    M. A. H. Fajardo, P. K. Lehre, and S. Lin, “Runtime analysis of a co-evolutionary algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 17th ACM/SIGEVO Conference on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms , Aug. 2023, pp. 73– 83

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Runtime analysis of coevolutionary algo- rithms on a class of symmetric zero-sum games,

    A. Benford and P. Lehre, “Runtime analysis of coevolutionary algo- rithms on a class of symmetric zero-sum games,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference , Jul. 2024, pp. 1542–1550

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Ranking diversity benefits coevolutionary algorithms on an intransitive game,

    M. Fajardo and P. Lehre, “Ranking diversity benefits coevolutionary algorithms on an intransitive game,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 2024, pp. 213–229

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Solving mixed pareto- lexicographic multiobjective optimization problems: The case of priority levels,

    L. Lai, L. Fiaschi, M. Cococcioni, and K. Deb, “Solving mixed pareto- lexicographic multiobjective optimization problems: The case of priority levels,”IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 971–985, Oct. 2021

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Sourcing strategies to keep up with competition: the case of SAP,

    M. Antero, J. Hedman, and S. Henningsson, “Sourcing strategies to keep up with competition: the case of SAP,” International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management , vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 61–74, Mar. 2022

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    The conquest of spaces: Exploring drivers of morpho- logical shifts through phylogenetic palaeoecology,

    J. C. Lamsdell, “The conquest of spaces: Exploring drivers of morpho- logical shifts through phylogenetic palaeoecology,” Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, vol. 583, p. 110672, Dec. 2021

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Complex evolutionary systems and the red queen,

    A. J. Robson, “Complex evolutionary systems and the red queen,” The Economic Journal, vol. 115, no. 504, pp. F211–F224, Jun. 2005

    work page 2005

  42. [42]

    Red queen coevolution on fitness land- scapes,

    R. V . Sol ´e and J. Sardany ´es, “Red queen coevolution on fitness land- scapes,” in Emergence, Complexity and Computation . Springer, 2014, pp. 301–338

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    Red queen dynamics in multi-host and multi-parasite interaction system,

    J. F. Rabajante, J. M. Tubay, T. Uehara, S. Morita, D. Ebert, and J. Yoshimura, “Red queen dynamics in multi-host and multi-parasite interaction system,” Scientific Reports, vol. 5, no. 1, Apr. 2015. 13

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    Chaotic red queen coevolution in three-species food chains,

    F. Dercole, R. Ferriere, and S. Rinaldi, “Chaotic red queen coevolution in three-species food chains,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 277, no. 1692, pp. 2321–2330, Aug. 2010

    work page 2010

  45. [45]

    The coevolution of preda- tor—prey interactions : ESSS and red queen dynamics,

    P. Marrow, R. Law, and C. Cannings, “The coevolution of preda- tor—prey interactions : ESSS and red queen dynamics,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences , vol. 250, no. 1328, pp. 133–141, Nov. 1992

    work page 1992

  46. [46]

    How long do red queen dynamics survive under genetic drift? A comparative analysis of evolutionary and eco-evolutionary models,

    H. Schenk, H. Schulenburg, and A. Traulsen, “How long do red queen dynamics survive under genetic drift? A comparative analysis of evolutionary and eco-evolutionary models,” BMC Evolutionary Biology, vol. 20, no. 1, Dec. 2020

    work page 2020

  47. [47]

    A competitive and cooperative evolutionary framework for ensemble of constraint handling techniques,

    Y . Li, W. Gong, Z. Hu, and S. Li, “A competitive and cooperative evolutionary framework for ensemble of constraint handling techniques,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems , vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 2440–2451, Apr. 2024

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    A knowledge-guided competitive co-evolutionary algo- rithm for feature selection,

    J. Zhou et al., “A knowledge-guided competitive co-evolutionary algo- rithm for feature selection,” Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 11, p. 4501, May 2024

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    The dynamical theory of coevolution: a derivation from stochastic ecological processes,

    U. Dieckmann and R. Law, “The dynamical theory of coevolution: a derivation from stochastic ecological processes,” Journal of Mathemat- ical Biology, vol. 34, no. 5–6, pp. 579–612, May 1996

    work page 1996

  50. [50]

    Complex dynamics in coevolution models with ratio- dependent functional response,

    P. Rikvold, “Complex dynamics in coevolution models with ratio- dependent functional response,” Ecological Complexity , vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 443–452, Dec. 2009

    work page 2009

  51. [51]

    Coevolution of slow–fast populations: evolutionary sliding, evolutionary pseudo- equilibria and complex red queen dynamics,

    F. Dercole, A. Ferri `ere, A. Gragnani, and S. Rinaldi, “Coevolution of slow–fast populations: evolutionary sliding, evolutionary pseudo- equilibria and complex red queen dynamics,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , vol. 273, no. 1589, pp. 983–990, Apr. 2006

    work page 2006

  52. [52]

    Long-term experimental evolution decouples size and production costs in Escherichia coli,

    D. J. Marshall et al., “Long-term experimental evolution decouples size and production costs in Escherichia coli,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , vol. 119, no. 21, May 2022

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    Coevolution and correlated multiplexity in multiplex networks,

    J. Kim and K.-I. Goh, “Coevolution and correlated multiplexity in multiplex networks,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 111, no. 5, Aug. 2013

    work page 2013

  54. [54]

    A note on strictly competitive games,

    I. Adler, C. Daskalakis, and C. H. Papadimitriou, “A note on strictly competitive games,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science . Springer, 2009, pp. 471–474

    work page 2009

  55. [55]

    Evolving predator and prey behaviours with co-evolution using genetic programming and decision trees,

    T. Francisco and G. M. J. dos Reis, “Evolving predator and prey behaviours with co-evolution using genetic programming and decision trees,” in Proceedings of the 10th annual conference companion on Genetic and evolutionary computation , vol. 13, Jul. 2008, pp. 1893– 1900. Hao Shi received the B.Sc. degree in Control Sci- ence and Engineering from the Army...

    work page 2008

  56. [56]

    Her current research interests include intelligent virtual forces, knowledge graphs, etc

    She is currently working as a lecturer at Army Engineering University, Shijiazhuang Campus. Her current research interests include intelligent virtual forces, knowledge graphs, etc

    work page