Month: January 2026

The fragile nature of road transportation networks

Linghang Sun, Yifan Zhang, Cristian Axenie, Margherita Grossi, Anastasios Kouvelas, Michail A. Makridis

Transportation Research Part B: Methodological

Volume 205, March 2026, 103386

Major cities worldwide experience problems with the performance of their road transportation networks, and the continuous increase in traffic demand presents a substantial challenge to the optimal operation of urban road networks and the efficiency of traffic control strategies. The operation of transportation systems is widely considered to display fragile property, i.e., the loss in performance increases exponentially with the linearly growing magnitude of disruptions. Meanwhile, the risk engineering community is embracing the novel concept of antifragility, enabling systems to learn from past events and exhibit improved performance under disruptions of previously unseen magnitudes. In this study, based on established traffic flow theory knowledge, namely the Macroscopic Fundamental Diagram (MFD), we first conduct a rigorous mathematical analysis to theoretically prove the fragile nature of road transportation networks. Subsequently, we propose a skewness-based indicator that can be readily applied to cross-compare the degree of fragility for different networks solely dependent on the MFD-related parameters. Finally, we implement a numerical simulation calibrated with real-world network data to bridge the gap between the theoretical proof and the practical operations, with results showing the reinforcing effect of higher-order statistics and stochasticity on the fragility of the networks. This work aims to demonstrate the fragile nature of road transportation networks and guide researchers towards adopting the methods of antifragile design for future networks and traffic control strategies.

Read the full article at: www.sciencedirect.com

Why AI Alignment Failure Is Structural: Learned Human Interaction Structures and AGI as an Endogenous Evolutionary Shock

Didier Sornette, Sandro Claudio Lera, Ke Wu
Recent reports of large language models (LLMs) exhibiting behaviors such as deception, threats, or blackmail are often interpreted as evidence of alignment failure or emergent malign agency. We argue that this interpretation rests on a conceptual error. LLMs do not reason morally; they statistically internalize the record of human social interaction, including laws, contracts, negotiations, conflicts, and coercive arrangements. Behaviors commonly labeled as unethical or anomalous are therefore better understood as structural generalizations of interaction regimes that arise under extreme asymmetries of power, information, or constraint. Drawing on relational models theory, we show that practices such as blackmail are not categorical deviations from normal social behavior, but limiting cases within the same continuum that includes market pricing, authority relations, and ultimatum bargaining. The surprise elicited by such outputs reflects an anthropomorphic expectation that intelligence should reproduce only socially sanctioned behavior, rather than the full statistical landscape of behaviors humans themselves enact. Because human morality is plural, context-dependent, and historically contingent, the notion of a universally moral artificial intelligence is ill-defined. We therefore reframe concerns about artificial general intelligence (AGI). The primary risk is not adversarial intent, but AGI’s role as an endogenous amplifier of human intelligence, power, and contradiction. By eliminating longstanding cognitive and institutional frictions, AGI compresses timescales and removes the historical margin of error that has allowed inconsistent values and governance regimes to persist without collapse. Alignment failure is thus structural, not accidental, and requires governance approaches that address amplification, complexity, and regime stability rather than model-level intent alone.

Read the full article at: arxiv.org

NetLogo Conference 2026

Chicago, IL, USA. June 29 – July 1, 2026

The NetLogo Center is excited to announce the inaugural NetLogo Conference this summer in Chicago! Join researchers, educators, artists, and business professionals sharing how they use agent-based modeling in their work. The conference will include research presentations, educational presentations, networking events, and educational workshops (e.g., NetLogo + GIS, ABM + AI, designing curricula with NetLogo). Abstract/proposal submissions are now open.

Deadline for abstract/proposal submissions: March 2, 2026

Full conference details and proposal submissions here: https://conference.netlogo.org/2026/

Read the full article at: conference.netlogo.org

Condorcet’s Paradox as Non-Orientability

Ori Livson, Siddharth Pritam, Mikhail Prokopenko
Preference cycles are prevalent in problems of decision-making, and are contradictory when preferences are assumed to be transitive. This contradiction underlies Condorcet’s Paradox, a pioneering result of Social Choice Theory, wherein intuitive and seemingly desirable constraints on decision-making necessarily lead to contradictory preference cycles. Topological methods have since broadened Social Choice Theory and elucidated existing results. However, characterisations of preference cycles in Topological Social Choice Theory are lacking. In this paper, we address this gap by introducing a framework for topologically modelling preference cycles that generalises Baryshnikov’s existing topological model of strict, ordinal preferences on 3 alternatives. In our framework, the contradiction underlying Condorcet’s Paradox topologically corresponds to the non-orientability of a surface homeomorphic to either the Klein Bottle or Real Projective Plane, depending on how preference cycles are represented. These findings allow us to reduce Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem to a statement about the orientability of a surface. Furthermore, these results contribute to existing wide-ranging interest in the relationship between non-orientability, impossibility phenomena in Economics, and logical paradoxes more broadly.

Read the full article at: arxiv.org

Finding Graph Isomorphisms in Heated Spaces in Almost No Time

Sara Najem, Amer E. Mouawad
Determining whether two graphs are structurally identical is a fundamental problem with applications spanning mathematics, computer science, chemistry, and network science. Despite decades of study, graph isomorphism remains a challenging algorithmic task, particularly for highly symmetric structures. Here we introduce a new algorithmic approach based on ideas from spectral graph theory and geometry that constructs candidate correspondences between vertices using their curvatures. Any correspondence produced by the algorithm is explicitly verified, ensuring that non-isomorphic graphs are never incorrectly identified as isomorphic. Although the method does not yet guarantee success on all isomorphic inputs, we find that it correctly resolves every instance tested in deterministic polynomial time, including a broad collection of graphs known to be difficult for classical spectral techniques. These results demonstrate that enriched spectral methods can be far more powerful than previously understood, and suggest a promising direction for the practical resolution of the complexity of the graph isomorphism problem.

Read the full article at: arxiv.org