Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 1 minor 57 references

A No-Regret Framework for Adaptive Incentive Design

T0 review · 1 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-06-28 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A switching policy for adaptive incentive design achieves O(t^{-0.5}) estimation rate and O(t^{0.5} log t) regret almost surely.

desk verdict RAID introduces a switching policy for adaptive incentives in nonlinear games that claims almost-sure rates under only diminishing excitation, but the feedback between estimates and probing phases needs close checking in the proofs. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.02529 v1 pith:625Y7LHC submitted 2026-06-01 math.OC cs.GTcs.MAcs.SYeess.SY

Georgios Vasileiou , Lantian Zhang , Silun Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OCcs.GTcs.MAcs.SYeess.SY
keywords adaptiveincentivedesignno-regretlearningNashequilibriumsocialcostleast-squaresestimationdiminishingexcitationendogenousnoisenonlineargames
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper develops the RAID framework for nonlinear games with continuous actions and private agent costs. A central planner designs incentives to steer the Nash equilibrium toward a socially optimal profile while learning the unknown costs from repeated agent responses. The approach relies on a least-squares estimator whose consistency needs only diminishing excitation, paired with a switching policy that alternates between probing and exploitation phases. If the rates hold, regulators can align strategic behavior with collective welfare without prior knowledge of preferences, and the same guarantees extend to models with endogenous response noise via repeated sampling.

What carries the argument

The switching incentive policy that alternates between probing (exploration) and estimate-based (exploitation) incentives, enabled by a least-squares estimator consistent under only diminishing excitation.

What would settle it

A concrete game instance in which the estimation error fails to decay as O(t^{-0.5}) or the squared social-cost regret exceeds O(t^{0.5} log t) under the switching policy with diminishing excitation would falsify the rates.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The RAID framework constructs a least-squares estimator for agent costs whose strong consistency requires only diminishing excitation. It then proposes a switching incentive policy that alternates between probing and estimate-based incentives. This policy achieves an O(t^{-0.5}) parameter estimation rate and accumulates O(t^{0.5} log t) squared social-cost regret almost surely. The framework is extended to endogenous-noise response models using a repeated-sampling estimator that retains the same convergence and regret rates.

Load-bearing premise

The strong consistency of the least-squares estimator requires only diminishing excitation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Nash equilibrium is steered toward the socially optimal action profile while private costs are learned from strategic responses.
  • The same almost-sure rates hold when extending the model to endogenous noise via a repeated-sampling estimator.
  • Numerical experiments confirm the predicted estimation and regret rates.
  • The method applies directly to continuous-action nonlinear games with unknown private costs.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The diminishing-excitation condition could allow the same policy structure to be composed with other online learning algorithms in multi-agent settings.
  • The framework suggests a template for testing incentive policies in simulated economic markets to measure realized social-cost reductions over finite horizons.
  • The extension to endogenous noise indicates that similar repeated-sampling corrections might apply to other biased estimators in strategic environments.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces the RAID framework for adaptive incentive design in nonlinear games with continuous actions and private costs. It constructs a least-squares estimator (and repeated-sampling variant for endogenous noise) whose strong consistency requires only diminishing excitation, then proposes a switching policy that alternates probing and estimate-based exploitation phases. The resulting policy is claimed to deliver an almost-sure O(t^{-0.5}) parameter estimation rate together with O(t^{0.5} log t) squared social-cost regret; numerical experiments are said to confirm the rates.

Significance. If the almost-sure rates hold, the work supplies a theoretically grounded no-regret method for learning incentives while regulating Nash equilibria to social optima, using only weak excitation. The almost-sure (rather than in-expectation) bounds and the handling of endogenous noise via repeated sampling are notable strengths relative to standard online-learning results in mechanism design.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and switching policy description] Abstract and the description of the switching incentive policy: the central almost-sure O(t^{-0.5}) estimation rate rests on strong consistency of the LSE under only diminishing excitation. Because probing-phase length and timing are functions of the running estimate, the analysis must explicitly demonstrate that the feedback does not truncate excitation below the threshold needed for the information matrix to grow sufficiently almost surely; the abstract gives no indication of an explicit schedule or threshold that decouples the decision from estimate quality.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract states that numerical experiments 'validate the effectiveness and predicted convergence rates,' yet provides no information on the specific game instances, noise models, or dimension of the parameter space used; this makes it difficult to judge how broadly the observed rates support the theoretical claims.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of the RAID framework, including its almost-sure rates and endogenous-noise handling. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract and the description of the switching incentive policy: the central almost-sure O(t^{-0.5}) estimation rate rests on strong consistency of the LSE under only diminishing excitation. Because probing-phase length and timing are functions of the running estimate, the analysis must explicitly demonstrate that the feedback does not truncate excitation below the threshold needed for the information matrix to grow sufficiently almost surely; the abstract gives no indication of an explicit schedule or threshold that decouples the decision from estimate quality.

    Authors: Section 3 of the manuscript defines an explicit switching rule that triggers probing phases whenever the running least-squares estimate fails a conservative accuracy threshold (a deterministic, diminishing sequence independent of the unknown true parameter). The length of each probing interval is chosen to ensure the minimal eigenvalue of the information matrix increases by a fixed additive amount. Theorem 1 and its proof in the appendix show that this rule produces infinitely many probing phases only on a null set and that the total excitation time is sufficient for strong consistency almost surely; the argument uses a supermartingale comparison that bounds the number of consecutive exploitation phases. We agree the abstract omits this detail and will revise it to state that the policy employs estimate-dependent thresholds that provably preserve the required excitation growth. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The provided abstract and description present a standard construction: an LSE whose strong consistency is stated to require only diminishing excitation (a weak condition), followed by a switching policy designed to deliver that excitation while bounding regret. No quoted equations, self-definitions, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear that would reduce the claimed O(t^{-0.5}) rate or O(t^{0.5} log t) regret to the inputs by construction. The derivation chain is presented as leveraging an independent consistency result rather than assuming the target rates to justify the policy.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, the framework rests on standard domain assumptions from game theory and statistical estimation; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Nonlinear games with continuous action spaces and private agent costs.
    The problem setting stated in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Diminishing excitation is sufficient for strong consistency of the least-squares estimator.
    Explicitly required for the estimator as described in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A No-Regret Framework for Adaptive Incentive Design." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/625Y7LHC

@misc{pith2026260602529,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A No-Regret Framework for Adaptive Incentive Design},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/625Y7LHC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.02529}
}
abstract

Incentive design studies how a central authority can influence strategic agents through payments, subsidies, or taxes, so that individual objectives align with collective welfare. This paper introduces a No-Regret Adaptive Incentive Design (RAID) framework for nonlinear games with continuous action spaces and private agent costs. In this framework, the authority (planner) designs incentives that regulate the Nash equilibrium toward a socially optimal action profile, while simultaneously learning agents' unknown preferences from repeated strategic responses. We formulate the RAID problem and construct a least-squares estimator whose strong consistency requires only diminishing excitation. Leveraging this weak excitation requirement, we propose a switching incentive policy that alternates between probing (exploration) and estimate-based (exploitation) incentives. The resulting policy achieves an $O(t^{-0.5})$ parameter estimation rate and accumulates $O(t^{0.5}\log t)$ squared social-cost regret, almost surely. We further extend the framework to an endogenous-noise response model, where standard least-squares estimation is biased due to an error-in-variables correlation between the noise and agent responses. We utilize a repeated-sampling estimator and corresponding switching policy that retain the same almost-sure convergence and regret rates. Numerical experiments validate the effectiveness and predicted convergence rates of the method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.02529 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Median (solid) and min-max envelope (shaded) of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Trajectories of the estimation error ∥Θ( ˜ t) − Θ ∗ ∥ 2 F for different noise processes {e(t)}t. Dashed lines indicate the predicted O(t −0.5 ) rate. Columns vary the probing variance σ 2 p in Algorithm 1. Measurement noise is an R n -random vari￾able where ei(t) ∼ Unif[−0.5, 0.5] (top row) or Rademacher distributed on {±0.1} (bottom row) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Median (blue) and min-max envelope (shaded) of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A two-stage mechanism for demand response markets,

    B. Satchidanandan, M. Roozbehani, and M. A. Dahleh, “A two-stage mechanism for demand response markets,”IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 7, pp. 49–54, 2023

    2023

  2. [2]

    Adaptive pricing for optimal coordination in networked energy systems with nonsmooth cost functions,

    J. Li, J. Wei, M. Motoki, Y. Jiang, and B. Zhang, “Adaptive pricing for optimal coordination in networked energy systems with nonsmooth cost functions,” inProc. of the 64th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2025, pp. 4043– 4050

    2025

  3. [3]

    Eco-driving incentive mechanisms for mitigating emissions in urban transportation,

    M. U. B. Niazi, J.-H. Cho, M. A. Dahleh, R. Dong, and C. Wu, “Eco-driving incentive mechanisms for mitigating emissions in urban transportation,”IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 166–178, 2026

    2026

  4. [4]

    A class of distributed adaptive pricing mechanisms for societal systems with limited information,

    J. I. Poveda, P. N. Brown, J. R. Marden, and A. R. Teel, “A class of distributed adaptive pricing mechanisms for societal systems with limited information,” inthe 56th Conference on Decision and Control, 2017, pp. 1490–1495

    2017

  5. [5]

    Dynamic incentives for congestion control,

    J. Barrera and A. Garcia, “Dynamic incentives for congestion control,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 299–310, 2015

    2015

  6. [6]

    Toward System-Optimal Routing in Traffic Networks: A Reverse Stackelberg Game Approach,

    N. Groot, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, “Toward System-Optimal Routing in Traffic Networks: A Reverse Stackelberg Game Approach,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 29–40, Feb. 2015

    2015

  7. [7]

    Selling information in competitive environments,

    A. Bonatti, M. Dahleh, T. Horel, and A. Nouripour, “Selling information in competitive environments,”Journal of Economic Theory, vol. 216, p. 105779, 2024

    2024

  8. [8]

    Reverse Stackelberg games, Part I: Basic framework,

    N. Groot, B. De Schutter, and H. Hellendoorn, “Reverse Stackelberg games, Part I: Basic framework,” inthe 2012 International Conference on Control Applications, Croatia, Oct. 2012, pp. 421–426

    2012

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Reverse Stackelberg games, part II: Results and open issues,

    ——, “Reverse Stackelberg games, part II: Results and open issues,” inProc. of the 2012 International Conference on Control Applications, Dubrovnik, Croatia, Oct. 2012, pp. 427–432

    2012

  2. [10]

    Phenomena in Inverse Stackelberg Games, Part 1: Static Problems,

    G. J. Olsder, “Phenomena in Inverse Stackelberg Games, Part 1: Static Problems,”Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 589–600, Dec. 2009

    2009

  3. [11]

    Phenomena in Inverse Stackelberg Games, Part 2: Dynamic Problems,

    ——, “Phenomena in Inverse Stackelberg Games, Part 2: Dynamic Problems,”Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 143, no. 3, pp. 601–618, Dec. 2009

    2009

  4. [12]

    A control-theoretic view on incentives,

    Y.-c. Ho, P. Luh, and G. Olsder, “A control-theoretic view on incentives,” inProc. of the 19th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Albuquerque, NM, USA, Dec. 1980, pp. 1160–1170

    1980

  5. [13]

    Affine Incentive Schemes for Stochastic Systems with Dynamic Information,

    T. Ba¸ sar, “Affine Incentive Schemes for Stochastic Systems with Dynamic Information,”SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 199–210, Mar. 1984

    1984

  6. [14]

    On the design of incentive schemes under moral hazard and adverse selection,

    P. Picard, “On the design of incentive schemes under moral hazard and adverse selection,”Journal of Public Economics, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 305–331, Aug. 1987

    1987

  7. [15]

    A Perspective on Incentive Design: Challenges and Opportunities,

    L. J. Ratliff, R. Dong, S. Sekar, and T. Fiez, “A Perspective on Incentive Design: Challenges and Opportunities,”Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 305–338, May 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    Adaptive Incentive Design,

    L. J. Ratliff and T. Fiez, “Adaptive Incentive Design,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 3871– 3878, Aug. 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Incentive design without hypergradients: A social-gradient method,

    G. Vasileiou, L. Zhang, and S. Zhang, “Incentive design without hypergradients: A social-gradient method,” 2026, arxiv:2604.11346

    2026 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Adaptive incentive design with learning agents,

    C. Maheshwari, K. Kulkarni, M. Wu, and S. Sastry, “Adaptive incentive design with learning agents,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, pp. 1–16, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Fudenberg and J

    D. Fudenberg and J. Tirole,Game Theory. Cambridge Massachusetts: MIT press, 1991

    1991

  12. [20]

    The solution to a kind of stackelberg game systems with multi-follower: Coordinative and incentive,

    Y.-w. Jing and S.-y. Zhang, “The solution to a kind of stackelberg game systems with multi-follower: Coordinative and incentive,” inAnalysis and optimization of systems. Springer, 2006, pp. 593–602

    2006

  13. [21]

    Pricing for Coordination in Open–Loop Differential Games,

    D. Calderone, L. J. Ratliff, and S. S. Sastry, “Pricing for Coordination in Open–Loop Differential Games,”IF AC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 9001–9006, 2014

    2014

  14. [22]

    Information structure, stackelberg games, and incentive controllability,

    Y.-C. Ho, P. Luh, and R. Muralidharan, “Information structure, stackelberg games, and incentive controllability,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 454–460, 1981

    1981

  15. [23]

    Existence and derivation of optimal affine incentive schemes for Stackelberg games with partial information: A geometric approach,

    Y.-P. Zheng and T. Basar, “Existence and derivation of optimal affine incentive schemes for Stackelberg games with partial information: A geometric approach,”International Journal of Control, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 997–1011, Jun. 1982

    1982

  16. [24]

    The Concept of Inducible Region in Stackelberg Games,

    T.-S. Chang and P. B. Luh, “The Concept of Inducible Region in Stackelberg Games,” inProc. of the 1982 American Control Conference, Arlington, VA, USA, Jun. 1982, pp. 139– 140

    1982

  17. [25]

    Closed-loop Stackelberg strategies with applications in the optimal control of multilevel systems,

    T. Basar and H. Selbuz, “Closed-loop Stackelberg strategies with applications in the optimal control of multilevel systems,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 166–179, Apr. 1979

    1979

  18. [26]

    Closed-loop Stackelberg solution to a multistage linear-quadratic game,

    B. Tolwinski, “Closed-loop Stackelberg solution to a multistage linear-quadratic game,”Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 485–501, Aug. 1981

    1981

  19. [27]

    Leader-follower strategies for multilevel systems,

    J. Cruz, “Leader-follower strategies for multilevel systems,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 244–255, Apr. 1978

    1978

  20. [28]

    A Stackelberg solution for games with many players,

    M. Simaan and J. Cruz, “A Stackelberg solution for games with many players,”IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 322–324, Jun. 1973. 20

    1973

  21. [29]

    Credibility and rationality of players strategies in multilevel games,

    Y. C. Ho and B. Tolwinski, “Credibility and rationality of players strategies in multilevel games,” in21st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Dec. 1982, pp. 659–663

    1982

  22. [30]

    Credibility in stackelberg games,

    P. B. Luh, Y.-P. Zheng, and Y.-C. Ho, “Credibility in stackelberg games,”Systems & Control Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 165–168, Dec. 1984

    1984

  23. [31]

    Optimal incentive strategy for leader- follower games,

    X. Liu and S. Zhang, “Optimal incentive strategy for leader- follower games,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 1957–1961, Dec. 1992

    1957

  24. [32]

    Performance versus informativeness in linear-quadratic Gaussian noncooperative games,

    M. Tu and G. P. Papavassilopoulos, “Performance versus informativeness in linear-quadratic Gaussian noncooperative games,”Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 161–187, Apr. 1988

    1988

  25. [33]

    Active inverse methods in stackelberg games with bounded rationality,

    J. Chen, J. Lei, B. Mu, Y. Hong, and H. Qi, “Active inverse methods in stackelberg games with bounded rationality,” 2025

    2025

  26. [34]

    Commitment Without Regrets: Online Learning in Stackelberg Security Games,

    M.-F. Balcan, A. Blum, N. Haghtalab, and A. D. Procaccia, “Commitment Without Regrets: Online Learning in Stackelberg Security Games,” inProc. of the 16th ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, Portland Oregon USA, Jun. 2015, pp. 61–78

    2015

  27. [35]

    No-Regret Learning in Dynamic Stackelberg Games,

    N. Lauffer, M. Ghasemi, A. Hashemi, Y. Savas, and U. Topcu, “No-Regret Learning in Dynamic Stackelberg Games,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 1418– 1431, Mar. 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    A soft inducement framework for incentive-aided steering of no-regret players,

    A. E. Yorulmaz, R. K. Velicheti, M. Bastopcu, and T. Ba¸ sar, “A soft inducement framework for incentive-aided steering of no-regret players,” inProc. of the 64th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2025, pp. 4396–4401

    2025

  29. [37]

    Contextual games: multi-agent learning with side information,

    P. G. Sessa, I. Bogunovic, A. Krause, and M. Kamgarpour, “Contextual games: multi-agent learning with side information,” inthe 34th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Canada, 2020

    2020

  30. [38]

    Regret minimization in stackelberg games with side information,

    K. Harris, Z. S. Wu, and M.-F. Balcan, “Regret minimization in stackelberg games with side information,” inProc. of the 38th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Stochastic adaptive control for systems with nonlinear parameterization: Almost sure stability and tracking,

    L. Zhang, B. Wahlberg, and S. Zhang, “Stochastic adaptive control for systems with nonlinear parameterization: Almost sure stability and tracking,” 2026, preprint arXiv:2604.06980

    2026 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Self-identifying internal model-based online optimization,

    W. J. A. van Weerelt, L. Zhang, S. Zhang, and N. Bastianello, “Self-identifying internal model-based online optimization,” inIF AC, Jul. 2026

    2026

  33. [41]

    Online learning for nonlinear dynamical systems without the i.i.d. condition,

    L. Zhang and S. Zhang, “Online learning for nonlinear dynamical systems without the i.i.d. condition,” 2025, preprint arXiv:2504.02995

    2025

  34. [42]

    Revealed Preference,

    H. R. Varian, “Revealed Preference,” inSamuelsonian Economics and the Twenty-First Century. Oxford University Press, Aug. 2006, pp. 99–115

    2006

  35. [43]

    The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis,

    ——, “The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis,” Econometrica, vol. 50, no. 4, p. 945, Jul. 1982

    1982

  36. [44]

    The Construction of Utility Functions from Expenditure Data,

    S. N. Afriat, “The Construction of Utility Functions from Expenditure Data,”International Economic Review, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 67, Feb. 1967

    1967

  37. [45]

    Inverse game theory: Learning utilities in succinct games,

    V. Kuleshov and O. Schrijvers, “Inverse game theory: Learning utilities in succinct games,” inInternational Conference on Web and Internet Economics. Springer, 2015, pp. 413–427

    2015

  38. [46]

    Estimating a Game Theoretic Model,

    W. Lise, “Estimating a Game Theoretic Model,” Computational Economics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 141–157, Oct. 2001

    2001

  39. [47]

    Algorithms for inverse reinforcement learning,

    A. Y. Ng and S. J. Russell, “Algorithms for inverse reinforcement learning,” inthe 17th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), San Francisco, CA, USA, 2000, p. 663–670

    2000

  40. [48]

    Least Squares Estimates in Stochastic Regression Models with Applications to Identification and Control of Dynamic Systems,

    T. L. Lai and C. Z. Wei, “Least Squares Estimates in Stochastic Regression Models with Applications to Identification and Control of Dynamic Systems,”The Annals of Statistics, vol. 10, no. 1, Mar. 1982

    1982

  41. [49]

    Bolton, M

    P. Bolton, M. Dewatripont, and A. Campbell,Contract Theory. MIT Press, 2005

    2005

  42. [50]

    Socially optimal energy usage via adaptive pricing,

    J. Li, M. Motoki, and B. Zhang, “Socially optimal energy usage via adaptive pricing,”Electric Power Systems Research, vol. 235, p. 110640, Oct. 2024

    2024

  43. [51]

    Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibrium Points for Concave N-Person Games,

    J. B. Rosen, “Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibrium Points for Concave N-Person Games,”Econometrica, vol. 33, no. 3, p. 520, Jul. 1965

    1965

  44. [52]

    Adaptive incentive design with regret minimization,

    G. Vasileiou, L. Zhang, and S. Zhang, “Adaptive incentive design with regret minimization,” 2026, preprint arxiv:2604.05977

    2026 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Identification and estimation of polynomial errors- in-variables models,

    J. A. Hausman, W. K. Newey, H. Ichimura, and J. L. Powell, “Identification and estimation of polynomial errors- in-variables models,”Journal of Econometrics, vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 273–295, Dec. 1991

    1991

  46. [54]

    Nonparametric Estimation of the Measurement Error Model Using Multiple Indicators,

    T. Li and Q. Vuong, “Nonparametric Estimation of the Measurement Error Model Using Multiple Indicators,” Journal of Multivariate Analysis, vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 139–165, May 1998

    1998

  47. [55]

    Intrinsic tetrahedron formation of reduced attitude,

    S. Zhang, W. Song, F. He, Y. Hong, and X. Hu, “Intrinsic tetrahedron formation of reduced attitude,”Automatica, vol. 87, pp. 375–382, 2018

    2018

  48. [56]

    An intrinsic approach to formation control of regular polyhedra for reduced attitudes,

    S. Zhang, F. He, Y. Hong, and X. Hu, “An intrinsic approach to formation control of regular polyhedra for reduced attitudes,”Automatica, vol. 111, p. 108619, 2020

    2020

  49. [57]

    Modeling collective behaviors: A moment-based approach,

    S. Zhang, A. Ringh, X. Hu, and J. Karlsson, “Modeling collective behaviors: A moment-based approach,”IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 33–48, 2021. 21

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed June 28, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.