Papers › The Coordination Gap: Multi-Agent Alternation Metrics for Temporal Fairness in Repeated Games
The Coordination Gap: Multi-Agent Alternation Metrics for Temporal Fairness in Repeated Games
Nikolaos Al. Papadopoulos, Ismael Tito Freire, Marti Sanchez-Fibla, Konstantinos E. Psannis
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Repeated multi-agent interactions require evaluation metrics that capture not only payoff distributions but also their temporal organization. Conventional outcome-based fairness measures can assign similar aggregate scores to temporally distinct coordination patterns, obscuring whether access to a shared resource is genuinely rotating or persistently monopolized. We study this problem in the Honey-Jar Game (HJG), a minimally dynamic repeated threshold-congestion Markov game in which n agents compete for exclusive access to a single high-reward resource. We introduce Perfect Alternation (PA), a reference turn-taking regime corresponding to the n-periodic round-robin picking sequence, together with six novel Alternation (ALT) metrics and a benchmarking methodology mapping ALT values to interpretable PA-equivalent performance. Using Q-learning agents as a minimal adaptive baseline against analytically derived random-policy baselines, we uncover a clear measurement failure: despite deceptively high traditional metrics (e.g., reward fairness often exceeding 0.9), learned policies perform worse than random on every ALT metric, by 34-74% on CALT and up to 92% on EALT, with PA-equivalent coordination falling to roughly one-fifth of the population at n=10. EALT further reveals two distinct failure patterns: without episodic memory (Type-A), the deficit grows from -20% at n=2 to -92% at n=10; with episodic memory (Type-B), it reaches a trough of -76% at n=5 before partially recovering to -10% at n=10. Conventional efficiency and fairness metrics do not reveal these differences. The ALT framework complements the temporal fair division and picking-sequence literature by diagnosing whether temporal fairness emerges spontaneously in decentralized adaptive systems rather than how to enforce it.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2603.05789")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 1 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
1 sample harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 1 of the 1 sample is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from dentros/Alternation. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
05dc4e7a012c5d71 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2603.05789, was issued in March 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections