The Shared Discovery Paradox: How a One-Answer Rule Turns Better Information into Worse Search· 共享发现悖论：单一答案规则如何将更好信息变成更差搜索
Organizations often pool dispersed information into one ranking and then allow many agents to act on that shared view. In a discovery problem, this can improve beliefs while reducing coverage. We develop an exactly solvable benchmark with sixteen boxes, one target, eight searchers, and noisy private clues. Pooling raises the accuracy of the best single recommendation from 0.20 to 0.3835, but repeating that recommendation lowers group discovery from 0.8322 under decentralized clue-following to 0.3835. A coordinated eight-action portfolio using the same pooled reports reaches 0.8594, and seven coordinated actions recover the decentralized benchmark. The paradox is a protocol failure, not an information failure: a one-answer rule compresses a portfolio of available actions into one repeated c
共享信息提高单个推荐准确性，却降低了整体发现效率。
- 核心方法
- 构建了一个可精确求解的基准测试，包括16个盒子、1个目标、8个搜索者和有噪声的私人线索，以此来分析信息池化的影响。
- 适合谁读
- 研究者 / 组织管理者
- 要解决的问题
- 研究共享信息池如何在提升单个推荐准确性的同时，导致整体搜索效能下降的问题。
- 关键实验
- 实验设置为16个盒子、1个目标、8个搜索者和有噪声的私人线索，对比了集中化和去中心化线索跟随下群体发现的概率。
- 主要贡献
- 揭示了共享发现悖论的本质，即协议失败而非信息失败，并通过协调行动组合展示了如何克服该悖论。
- 意义与局限
- 该研究对组织如何有效利用分散信息以避免单一答案规则带来的负面影响具有重要启示意义。局限性在于模型假设较简化，实际应用场景可能更复杂。