Score contribution per author:
α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count
We develop a general game-theoretic framework for reasoning about strategic agents performing possibly costly computation. In this framework, many traditional game-theoretic results (such as the existence of a Nash equilibrium) no longer hold. Nevertheless, we can use the framework to provide psychologically appealing explanations of observed behavior in well-studied games (such as finitely repeated prisoner's dilemma and rock–paper–scissors). Furthermore, we provide natural conditions on games sufficient to guarantee that equilibria exist.