mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Rational Adversaries and the Maintenance of Fragility: A Game-Theoretic Theory of Rational Stagnation

arXiv 2510.22232 ↗First posted 25 Oct 2025cs.GT cs.AI econ.THcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Cooperative systems often remain in persistently suboptimal yet stable states. This paper explains such "rational stagnation" as an equilibrium sustained by a rational adversary whose utility follows the principle of potential loss, uD = Uideal - Uactual. Starting from the Prisoner's Dilemma, we show that the transformation ui' = a,ui + b,uj and the ratio of mutual recognition w = b/a generate a fragile cooperation band [wmin,,wmax] where both (C,C) and (D,D) are equilibria. Extending to a dynamic model with stochastic cooperative payoffs Rt and intervention costs (Cc,,Cm), a Bellman-style analysis yields three strategic regimes: immediate destruction, rational stagnation, and intervention abandonment. The appendix further generalizes the utility to a reference-dependent nonlinear form and proves its stability under reference shifts, ensuring robustness of the framework. Applications to social-media algorithms and political trust illustrate how adversarial rationality can deliberately preserve fragility.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 1 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Oct 2025.

Builds on

1 of 22 references.

References · 1

  1. 2014Stackelberg vs. Nash in Security Games: An Extended Investigation of Interchangeability, Equivalence, and Uniquenesscited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.