A Framework for Contractual Graphs

This paper studies contractual graphs, where the formation of edges between nodes result in dyadic exchanges. Each dyadic exchange is analyzed as a contractual agreement that is implemented upon fulfilment of underlying conditions. As these dyadic exchanges proliferate, the resulting population of these exchanges creates a contractual graph. A contractual framework for graphs is especially useful in applications where AI-enabled software is employed to create or automate smart contracts between nodes. While some smart contracts may be easily created and executed, others may contain a higher level of ambiguity which may prevent their efficient implementation. Ambiguity in contractual elements is especially difficult to implement, since nodes have to efficiently sense the ambiguity and allocate appropriate amounts of computational resources to the ambiguous contractual task. This paper develops a two-node contractual model of graphs, with varying levels of ambiguity in the contracts and examines its consequences for a market where tasks of differing ambiguity are available to be completed by nodes. The central theme of this paper is that as ambiguity increases, it is difficult for nodes to efficiently commit to the contract since there is an uncertainty in the amount of resources that they have to allocate for completion of the tasks specified in the contract. Thus, while linguistic ambiguity or situational ambiguity might not be cognitively burdensome for humans, it might become expensive for nodes involved in the smart contract. The paper also shows that timing matters—the order in which nodes enter the contract is important as they proceed to sense the ambiguity in a task and then allocate appropriate resources. We propose a game-theoretic formulation to scrutinize how nodes that move first to complete a task are differently impacted than those that move second. We discuss the applications of such a contractual framework for graphs and obtain conditions under which two-node contracts can achieve a successful coalition.

A particular kind of ‘action-reaction’

In this article, I discuss a particular (and little studied) action-reaction exchange in Spanish and Romanian, consisting of a dyadic exchange where an exploratory speech act (i.e., a question) is followed by a sequence-dependent reactive speech act, which repeats parts or all of the trigger’s structure in an interrogative form. Rather than being a canonical echo question, the reactive speech act under discussion represents what I call an Interrogative Echo Response (IER), by virtue of the fact that it provides an answer of opposite polarity to that of the initiative move put forward by the questioner (or Interrogative Echo Reply, when the response may or must be explicitly provided after the sequence-dependent interrogative utterance). In both languages, these IERs (and IERps) have a distinct syntactic structure, and the discourse function they fulfill is that of rhetorically challenging the validity of the initial move and providing (or implying) a response of opposite polarity with regard to the triggering question.

Are there just two people in a dyad? Dyadic configurations in multiparty family conversations

Dyadic interaction does not necessarily imply that just two people are present. It is often possible to single out episodes of dyadic interaction in multiparty contexts that we analyse, such as family dinner table conversation. Within such a speech event, multiparty participation framework (variously organized) is the default conversational structure. Consequently, a groundwork(Goffman, 1964) is required for participants to gain space and exclusivity for a dyadic exchange. This paper shows how dyadic framework is made out of the multiparty default interactional structure of a family dinner. Furthermore, we analyze the resources participants deploy to protect the dyadic exchange from anothers intrusion and/or by the risk of desertion of one member of the dyad. Young and older children actively participate in that activity and learn to manage it through diverse dyadic settings. It is not the number of participants that unequivocally determines whether an interaction is dyadic or multiparty. Varying and complex participation frameworks, alliances, and challenges are built and transformed within family dinner conversation; it is in their locus of the interactive organization of ongoing activity in which children are socialized to a complex socio-cognitive activity.