arXiv subjects

Isabel Trevino

Publications and source records attributed to Isabel Trevino.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Visibility Design and Strategic Reasoning

Dashboards, feeds, and leaderboards determine whom agents believe they are playing against. We study how such information architectures shape strategic behavior, and how a designer who controls them can use visibility as a lever. We propose a behavioral model in which a transparency parameter governs how selectively agents are exposed to opponents of nearby reasoning depth, and embed it in a Cognitive Hierarchy environment, which provides a tractable language for tying agents' beliefs about the sophistication of others to what they see. We show that because the exposure operator is an exponential tilt of the type distribution, the effect of transparency on aggregate behavior has a closed form: the derivative of the aggregate action with respect to $p$ is proportional to the population-average variance of perceived sophistication. This identity signs the effect in games of strategic complements (opacity raises aggregate effort) and in coordination environments (opacity lowers the mean action), and an ordinal version holds for any response rule that is monotone in the belief. Notably, under a Poisson prior, opacity acts as a sophistication multiplier: every reasoner plays as if the population were $\mathrm{Poisson}(τ/p)$. We use this structure to characterize the disagreement-versus-level tradeoff faced by a coordination-minded designer, to identify the reasoning depths that respond most to visibility, and to show that opacity imposes a ``sophistication tax'' under which the deepest reasoners can lose to moderate ones. Simulations in which agents see only a noisy leaderboard of published actions reproduce both the reversal and the tax. Together, our findings highlight that who an agent sees, and not only how deeply it reasons, shapes strategic behavior, and point to visibility as a design lever.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

The Architecture of Illusion: Network Opacity and Strategic Escalation

Standard models of bounded rationality typically assume agents either possess accurate knowledge of the population's reasoning abilities (Cognitive Hierarchy) or hold dogmatic, degenerate beliefs (Level-$k$). We introduce the ``Connected Minds'' model, which unifies these frameworks by integrating iterative reasoning with a parameterized network bias. We posit that agents do not observe the global population; rather, they observe a sample biased by their network position, governed by a locality parameter $p$ representing algorithmic ranking, social homophily, or information disclosure. We show that this parameter acts as a continuous bridge: the model collapses to the myopic Level-$k$ recursion as networks become opaque ($p \to 0$) and recovers the standard Cognitive Hierarchy model under full transparency ($p=1$). Theoretically, we establish that network opacity induces a \emph{Sophisticated Bias}, causing agents to systematically overestimate the cognitive depth of their opponents while preserving the log-concavity of belief distributions. This makes $p$ an actionable lever: a planner or platform can tune transparency, globally or by segment (a personalized $p_k$), to shape equilibrium behavior. From a mechanism design perspective, we derive the \emph{Escalation Principle}: in games of strategic complements, restricting information can maximize aggregate effort by trapping agents in echo chambers where they compete against hallucinated, high-sophistication peers. Conversely, we identify a \emph{Transparency Reversal} for coordination games, where maximizing network visibility is required to minimize variance and stabilize outcomes. Our results suggest that network topology functions as a cognitive zoom lens, determining whether agents behave as local imitators or global optimizers.

cs.GT↗