English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This question is raised by Cason, Friedman and Hopkins (CFH, 2012) after theyfirstly found and indexed quantitatively the cycles in a continuous timeexperiment. To answer this question, we use the data from standard RPSexperiment. Our experiments are of the traditional setting - in each ofrepeated rounds, the subjects are paired with random matching, using purestrategy and must choose simultaneously, and after each round, each subjectobtains only private information. This economics environment is a decartelizedand low-information one.  Using the cycle rotation indexes (CRI, developed by CFH) method, we find, thecycles not only exist but also persist in our experiment. Meanwhile, thecycles' direction are consistent with 'standard' learning models. That is theanswer to the CHF question: Cycles do not dissipate in the simultaneouslychoose game.  In addtion, we discuss three questions (1) why significant cycles are uneasyto be obtained in traditional setting experiments; (2) why CRI can be an iconicindexing-method for 'standard' evolution dynamics; and (3) where more cyclescould be expected.

Do cycles dissipate when subjects must choose simultaneously?