Open Access
Issue
ESAIM: COCV
Volume 30, 2024
Article Number 35
Number of page(s) 59
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv/2024023
Published online 22 April 2024
  1. J. Von Neumann and O. Morgenstern, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd revised edn. Princeton University Press (1947). [Google Scholar]
  2. T. Killingback and M. Doebeli, Spatial evolutionary game theory: hawks and doves revisited. Proc. Biol. Sci. 263 (1996) 1135–1144. [Google Scholar]
  3. J. Ghaderi and R. Srikant, Opinion dynamics in social networks: a local interaction game with stubborn agents, in 2013 American Control Conference. IEEE (2013) 1982–1987. [Google Scholar]
  4. M. Huang R.P. Malhamé and P.E. Caines, Large population stochastic dynamic games: closed-loop McKean–Vlasov systems and the Nash certainty equivalence principle. Commun. Inform. Syst. (2006). [Google Scholar]
  5. J.M. Lasry and P.L. Lions, Mean field games. Jap. J. Math. 2 (2007) 229–260. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Y. Achdou, J. Han and J.M. Lasry, et al., Income and wealth distribution in macroeconomics: a continuous-time approach. Rev. Econ. Stud. 89 (2022) 45–86. [Google Scholar]
  7. M.d.M. González Nogueras, M.P. Gualdani and J.d. Solà-Morales Rubió, Instability and bifurcation in a trend depending price formation model. Acta Appl. Math. 144 (2016) 121–136. [Google Scholar]
  8. P. Grover, K. Bakshi and E.A. Theodorou, A mean-field game model for homogeneous flocking. Chaos 28 (2018) 061103. [Google Scholar]
  9. L. Stella, D. Bauso and P. Colaneri, Mean-field game for collective decision-making in honeybees via switched systems. IEEE Trans. Automatic Control 67 (2021) 3863–3878. [Google Scholar]
  10. Y. Xu, Z. Yang, W. Gu, et al., Robust real-time distributed optimal control based energy management in a smart grid. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 8 (2015) 1568–1579. [Google Scholar]
  11. A. Seguret, C. Wan and C. Alasseur, A mean field control approach for smart charging with aggregate power demand constraints, in 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Europe (ISGT Europe). IEEE (2021) 01–05. [Google Scholar]
  12. M. Tan and Q. Le, EfficientNet: rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks. Chaudhuri K, Salakhutdinov R. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research: Vol. 97. Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR (2019) 6105–6114. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v97/tan19a.html. [Google Scholar]
  13. A. Cavagna, A. Cimarelli, I. Giardina, et al., Scale-free correlations in starling flocks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107 (2010) 11865–11870. [Google Scholar]
  14. T. Mora and W. Bialek, Are biological systems poised at criticality?. J. Stat. Phys. 144 (2011) 268–302. [Google Scholar]
  15. J.J. Hopfield, Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 79 (1982) 2554–2558. [Google Scholar]
  16. D.R. Chialvo, Emergent complex neural dynamics. Nat. Phys. 6 (2010) 744–750. [Google Scholar]
  17. F. Vanni, M. Lukovioć and P. Grigolini, Criticality and transmission of information in a swarm of cooperative units. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 078103. [Google Scholar]
  18. R. Carmona, Q. Cormier and H.M. Soner, Synchronization in a kuramoto mean field game. Commun. Partial Differ. Equa. (2023) 1–31. [Google Scholar]
  19. A. De Masi, E. Orlandi, E. Presutti, et al., Glauber evolution with Kac potentials. I. Mesoscopic and macroscopic limits, interface dynamics. Nonlinearity 7 (1994) 633. [Google Scholar]
  20. A.D. Masi, E. Orlandi, E. Presutti, et al., Glauber evolution with Kac potentials. II. Fluctuations. Nonlinearity 9 (1996) 27–51. [Google Scholar]
  21. A. De Masi, E. Orlandi, E. Presutti, et al., Glauber evolution with Kac potentials. III. Spinodal decomposition. Nonlinearity 9 (1996) 53. [Google Scholar]
  22. U. Horst, Dynamic systems of social interactions. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 73 (2010) 158–170. [Google Scholar]
  23. U. Horst and J.A. Scheinkman, Equilibria in systems of social interactions. J. Econ. Theory 130 (2006) 44–77. [Google Scholar]
  24. F. Collet, M. Formentin and D. Tovazzi, Rhythmic behavior in a two-population mean-field Ising model. Phys. Rev. E 94 (2016) 042139. [Google Scholar]
  25. A. Leonidov, A. Savvateev and A.G. Semenov, Ising game on graphs. (2021). [Google Scholar]
  26. A. Seguret, Mean field approximation of an optimal control problem for the continuity equation arising in smart charging. Appl. Math. Optim. 88 (2023) 1–44. [Google Scholar]
  27. R. Carmona, F. Delarue, et al., Probabilistic Theory of Mean Field Games with Applications I–II. Springer (2018). [Google Scholar]
  28. D.A. Gomes, J. Mohr and R.R. Souza, Continuous time finite state mean field games. Appl. Math. Optim. 68 (2013) 99–143. [Google Scholar]
  29. V.N. Kolokoltsov and A. Bensoussan, Mean-field-game model for botnet defense in cyber-security. Appl. Math. Optim. 74 (2016) 669–692. [Google Scholar]
  30. E. Bayraktar and A. Cohen, Analysis of a finite state many player game using its master equation. SIAM J. Control Optim. 56 (2018) 3538–3568. [Google Scholar]
  31. A. Cecchin and G. Pelino, Convergence, fluctuations and large deviations for finite state mean field games via the master equation. Stochast. Processes Appl. 129 (2019) 4510–4555. [Google Scholar]
  32. M. Cirant and G. Verzini, Bifurcation and segregation in quadratic two-populations mean field games systems. ESAIM: Control Optim. Calc. Var. 23 (2017) 1145–1177. [Google Scholar]
  33. M. Bardi and M. Fischer, On non-uniqueness and uniqueness of solutions in finite-horizon mean field games. ESAIM: Control Optim. Calc. Var. 25 (2019) 44. [Google Scholar]
  34. E. Bayraktar and X. Zhang, On non-uniqueness in mean field games. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 148 (2020) 4091–4106. [Google Scholar]
  35. P. Cardaliaguet, F. Delarue, J.M. Lasry, et al., The Master Equation and the Convergence Problem in Mean Field Games (ams-201). Princeton University Press (2019). [Google Scholar]
  36. D. Lacker, On the convergence of closed-loop Nash equilibria to the mean field game limit. Ann. Appl. Probab. 30 (2020) 1693–1761. [Google Scholar]
  37. P. Cardaliaguet and M. Masoero, Weak KAM theory for potential MFG. J. Difer. Equ. 268 (2020) 3255–3298. [Google Scholar]
  38. M. Masoero, On the long time convergence of potential MFG. Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 26 (2019) 1–45. [Google Scholar]
  39. A. Cesaroni and M. Cirant, Stationary equilibria and their stability in a kuramoto mfg with strong interaction. Commun. Partial Difer. Equ. 49 (2024) 121–147. [Google Scholar]
  40. T. Bodineau, The Wulff construction in three and more dimensions. Commun. Math. Phys. 207 (1999) 197–229. [Google Scholar]
  41. G. Alberti, G. Bellettini, M. Cassandro, et al., Surface tension in Ising systems with Kac potentials. J. Stat. Phys. 82 (1996) 743–796. [Google Scholar]
  42. L.C. Evans, H.M. Soner and P.E. Souganidis, Phase transitions and generalized motion by mean curvature. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 45 (1992) 1097–1123. [Google Scholar]
  43. M.A. Katsoulakis and P.E. Souganidis, Generalized motion by mean curvature as a macroscopic limit of stochastic Ising models with long range interactions and Glauber dynamics. Commun. Math. Phys. 169 (1995) 61–97. [Google Scholar]
  44. L. Modica, The gradient theory of phase transitions and the minimal interface criterion. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 98 (1987) 123–142. [CrossRef] [MathSciNet] [Google Scholar]
  45. G. Bouchitté, Singular perturbations of variational problems arising from a two-phase transition model. Appl. Math. Optim. 21 (1990) 289–314. [Google Scholar]
  46. G. Alberti and G. Bellettini, A non-local anisotropic model for phase transitions: asymptotic behaviour of rescaled energies. Eur. J. Appl. Math. 9 (1998) 261–284. [Google Scholar]
  47. S. Conti, I. Fonseca and G. Leoni, A Γ-convergence result for the two-gradient theory of phase transitions. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 55 (2002) 857–936. [Google Scholar]
  48. E. Sandier and S. Serfaty, Gamma-convergence of gradient flows with applications to Ginzburg–Landau. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 57 (2004) 1627–1672. [Google Scholar]
  49. A. Bressan, M.T. Chiri and N. Salehi, Optimal control of moving sets. Submitted, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  50. A. Bressan, M.T. Chiri and N. Salehi, On the optimal control of propagation fronts. (2021). [Google Scholar]
  51. J. Simons, Minimal varieties in Riemannian manifolds. Ann. Math. (1968) 62–105. [Google Scholar]
  52. F. Morgan, The cone over the Clifford torus in ℝ4 is Φ-minimizing. Math. Ann. 289 (1991) 341–354. [Google Scholar]
  53. G. Alberti and G. Bellettini, A nonlocal anisotropic model for phase transitions. Math. Ann. 310 (1998) 527–560. [Google Scholar]
  54. Y. Tonegawa and N. Wickramasekera, Stable phase interfaces in the van der Waals–Cahn–Hilliard theory. J. Angew. Math. 2012 (2012) 191–210. [Google Scholar]
  55. O. Chodosh and C. Mantoulidis, Minimal surfaces and the Allen–Cahn equation on 3-manifolds: index, multiplicity, and curvature estimates. Ann. Math. 191 (2020) 213–328. [Google Scholar]
  56. W. Gangbo, A.R. Mészáros, C. Mou, et al., Mean field games master equations with nonseparable hamiltonians and displacement monotonicity. Ann. Probab. 50 (2022) 2178–2217. [Google Scholar]
  57. F. Delarue, D. Lacker and K. Ramanan, et al., From the master equation to mean field game limit theory: a central limit theorem. Electron. J. Probab. (2019) 24. [Google Scholar]
  58. L.C. Evans and R.F. Gariepy, Measure Theory and Fine Properties of Functions. Routledge (2018). [Google Scholar]
  59. I. Fonseca and S. Müller, Relaxation of quasiconvex functional in BV(Ω, ℝp) for integrands f (x, u, ∇u). Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 123 (1993) 1–49. [Google Scholar]
  60. L.C. Evans and R.F. Gariepy, Blowup, compactness and partial regularity in the calculus of variations. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 36 (1987) 361–371. [Google Scholar]
  61. D. Spector, Simple proofs of some results of Reshetnyak. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. (2011) 1681–1690. [Google Scholar]
  62. E. Giusti and G.H. Williams, Minimal Surfaces and Functions of Bounded Variation, Vol. 80. Springer (1984). [Google Scholar]
  63. A. Farah, Proving the regularity of the reduced boundary of perimeter minimizing sets with the De Giorgi lemma. (2020). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.