At the level of Interaction, pathways describe how multiple decision-makers’ actions, information states, and constraints are organized into jointly admissible patterns of behavior. While interaction laws specify which strategic configurations are possible and interaction mechanisms specify how individual actions are produced or adjusted, pathways capture how those mechanisms are ordered, repeated, and linked across agents to generate stable, unstable, or shifting patterns of coordination.
Interaction pathways are structurally richer than those of Choice because strategic dependence introduces iteration, feedback, and conditional branching as core features rather than optional refinements. Strategic outcomes are rarely produced in a single step; they emerge through repeated adjustment, mutual influence, and elimination of incompatible configurations. As a result, multiple pathway archetypes are structurally primary at this layer, not merely supportive.
The pathway perspective makes clear why interaction cannot be reduced to simultaneous choice or static equilibrium conditions. It is the organization of mechanisms over time and dependence—how influence propagates, how responses iterate, how feedback stabilizes or destabilizes outcomes, and how regimes shift—that defines strategic behavior. The archetypes that follow describe the fundamental pathway structures through which interaction becomes possible, coherent, and analyzable within the Science Analysis Template.
SAT – Structure – Pathways – Archetypes (the 7) – Interaction (Markets, Strategy & Mechanisms)
| Archetype | Status | Structural Role |
|---|---|---|
| Propagation | Primary | Transmits strategic influence and information across agents. |
| Transformation | Secondary | Maps actions and beliefs into outcomes or strategic positions. |
| Selection | Primary | Eliminates incompatible strategies or outcomes. |
| Iteration | Primary | Supports repeated strategic adjustment and convergence. |
| Feedback | Primary | Enables self-referential dependence of strategies on prior outcomes. |
| Assembly | Secondary | Forms joint outcomes or coordinated structures. |
| Regime Transition | Secondary | Marks shifts between strategic equilibria or interaction modes. |
Propagation
In the context of Interaction, propagation organizes how strategic influence and information move across agents. A propagative interaction pathway specifies how a change in one agent’s action, belief, or informational state becomes causally relevant to other agents without altering the semantic type of what is being transmitted. What propagates may be influence, expectations, constraints, or signals, but its identity is preserved as it passes through the system.
Structurally, interactional propagation consists of sequential or networked linkage of mechanism executions across agents. The output state of one agent’s mechanism execution conditions the input state of another’s, creating chains of dependence that extend beyond isolated decision points. This propagation does not resolve strategic compatibility or eliminate options on its own; it ensures that local actions are nonlocal in consequence, enabling interaction to exist as a system rather than as parallel individual choices.
Propagation is primary in Interaction because, without it, agents’ actions would have no mutual relevance. Strategic dependence requires that actions, information, or constraints carry forward across agents. Within composite interaction pathways, propagation frequently supports iteration, feedback, and selection by ensuring that adjustments and eliminations are based on shared and transmitted state rather than independent inference.
Transformation
In the context of Interaction, transformation organizes how strategic inputs are converted into different strategic representations or outcomes. A transformative interaction pathway specifies how actions, beliefs, or information states are mapped into new forms—such as payoffs, expectations, or strategic positions—without merely transmitting them unchanged. What defines transformation here is the change in semantic role of the state as it moves through the interaction.
Structurally, interactional transformation consists of ordered mechanism executions that implement a mapping from one strategic representation to another. An agent’s action may be transformed into an outcome, a belief may be transformed into a strategy, or a joint configuration may be transformed into a payoff-relevant state. Unlike selection, transformation does not reduce the set of possibilities; and unlike propagation, it does not preserve state identity. It produces a new strategic object that becomes the basis for subsequent interaction.
Transformation is secondary in Interaction because strategic coordination can be defined without specifying how representations are converted, but not without propagation, iteration, or selection. Nevertheless, transformation plays a critical supporting role by enabling strategic information to change form as it moves through the system. Within composite interaction pathways, transformation typically mediates between propagation and selection, allowing transmitted influence to be re-expressed in forms that can be compared, filtered, or fed back into future strategic adjustment.
Selection
In the context of Interaction, selection organizes how strategically incompatible configurations are eliminated. A selective interaction pathway specifies how, from an initially broad set of possible joint actions or strategies, only those that satisfy mutual consistency, feasibility, or incentive constraints remain admissible. What defines selection here is the reduction of the joint strategic state space, not the transformation of states or their repeated refinement.
Structurally, interactional selection consists of branching followed by pruning at the level of joint configurations. Mechanism executions admit multiple possible continuations, after which constraints imposed by the interaction structure remove configurations that cannot coexist without contradiction. The surviving strategies are not altered in kind; they persist because they satisfy conditions that others fail to meet. Selection therefore preserves state identity while narrowing the space of possibilities.
Selection is primary in Interaction because strategic systems cannot be defined without a means of excluding incompatible joint behavior. Without selection, interaction would degenerate into unconstrained coexistence of actions with no notion of strategic admissibility. Within composite interaction pathways, selection typically operates alongside propagation and iteration, progressively eliminating infeasible or unstable configurations as strategic influence circulates and adjustments repeat.
Iteration
In the context of Interaction, iteration organizes how strategic states are updated repeatedly under stable interaction rules. An iterative interaction pathway specifies how agents reapply the same adjustment or response mechanisms across successive stages, producing sequences of strategic updates rather than one-off outcomes. What defines iteration here is the persistence of the update structure across steps, not the resolution of compatibility or the transformation of strategic representations.
Structurally, interactional iteration consists of recurrent execution of the same mechanism—such as action adjustment, belief updating, or response recalculation—where each execution takes the previous strategic state as its input. The pathway advances through successive rounds of adjustment, allowing strategic configurations to evolve over time without altering the underlying rules that govern interaction. Iteration does not, by itself, guarantee convergence or stability; it simply enables repeated strategic dependence to unfold.
Iteration is primary in Interaction because strategic behavior is inherently dynamic. Without iteration, interaction would collapse into a single simultaneous move with no capacity for response, adaptation, or mutual adjustment. Within composite interaction pathways, iteration frequently works in tandem with propagation and selection, enabling strategic influence to circulate and incompatible configurations to be progressively excluded as the system evolves.
Feedback
In the context of Interaction, feedback organizes how the outcomes of prior strategic configurations influence subsequent strategic behavior. A feedback interaction pathway specifies that later states of the interaction re-enter as conditions shaping future mechanism executions, such that strategic adjustment is conditioned on the interaction’s own history. What defines feedback here is not repetition alone, but self-referential dependence across stages of interaction.
Structurally, interactional feedback consists of closed-loop arrangements in which outputs—such as realized outcomes, observed actions, or inferred expectations—are fed back into agents’ subsequent decision processes. This loop alters how future strategic updates are generated, enabling amplification, dampening, stabilization, or destabilization of behavior over time. Feedback differs from iteration in that the governing response structure is conditioned by prior outcomes rather than remaining fixed across repetitions.
Feedback is primary in Interaction because strategic environments routinely involve history dependence. Without feedback, interaction would permit repeated adjustment but could not account for reinforcement, punishment, credibility, reputation, or endogenous stabilization. Within composite interaction pathways, feedback modulates propagation and iteration by tying present strategic choices to past interactional states, thereby shaping long-run patterns of coordination or conflict.
Assembly
In the context of Interaction, assembly organizes how joint strategic structures are formed from individual actions or components. An assembly interaction pathway specifies how multiple agents’ choices, roles, or contributions are combined into a higher-order configuration—such as a coordinated outcome, institutional arrangement, or collective structure—that cannot be reduced to any single agent’s action alone. What defines assembly here is the construction of a composite strategic state.
Structurally, interactional assembly consists of convergent linkage of mechanism executions, where distinct inputs from multiple agents are brought together into a unified configuration. The pathway does not merely aggregate actions numerically; it organizes them relationally, establishing roles, dependencies, or collective properties that only exist at the joint level. The constituent actions retain their identity, but the assembled outcome exhibits new structural features.
Assembly is secondary in Interaction because strategic systems can be defined without requiring the formation of durable collective structures. However, when coordination, institutions, coalitions, or joint outcomes are central, assembly pathways become necessary to explain how interaction produces organized collective states rather than isolated actions. Within composite interaction pathways, assembly typically follows propagation, iteration, and selection, consolidating admissible strategic behavior into structured joint outcomes that can then be stabilized or modified by feedback.
Regime Transition
In the context of Interaction, regime transition organizes how the governing structure of strategic interaction itself changes. A regime transition interaction pathway specifies a shift in the rules, constraints, or admissible configurations that define how agents interact, such that subsequent strategic behavior operates under a qualitatively different interaction regime. What defines this archetype is not a change in actions alone, but a change in the structural conditions under which actions are evaluated and coordinated.
Structurally, interactional regime transition consists of a threshold-mediated reconfiguration of the interaction framework. Accumulated strategic states—such as patterns of play, distributions of actions, or stability properties—trigger a transition in which prior equilibria, admissibility conditions, or response structures cease to apply and new ones take effect. Mechanisms may continue to operate before and after the transition, but their meaning and consequences are altered by the new regime.
Regime transition is secondary in Interaction because strategic interaction can be coherently defined within a fixed regime. However, it becomes structurally relevant when interaction shifts between distinct modes of coordination or conflict. Within composite interaction pathways, regime transitions typically mark boundaries between qualitatively different phases of strategic behavior, after which propagation, iteration, selection, and feedback operate under newly defined interactional conditions.