---
slug: signaling_arms_race
name: Signaling Arms Race
one_liner: "Rivals escalate ever-costlier signals to stay distinguishable, each investment neutralized by the others' matching response, so cost ratchets upward while relative position holds — the escalation dual of static information asymmetry, where closing the gap is itself the engine of spiraling cost."
type: prime
schema_version: 2
status: density_v2_draft
categories: [economic, biological, dynamical]
origin_domain: economics_signaling_theory
alternate_origin_domains: [evolutionary_biology, military_strategy, social_status_competition]
aliases: [costly_signaling_spiral, signaling_escalation, red_queen_signaling, escalating_signal_competition, positional_arms_race]
related: []
solution_archetypes: []
review_flags:
- "OPERATOR-DERIVED (op-01 dualization, sub-flavor 1c) — the dynamic/escalation dual of `information_asymmetry` along the static-gap-vs-escalating-closure axis. Discovered in the op-01 full sweep 2026-07-03. Verified absent via search_prime (no exact slug, no lexical_fallback) + slug check; nearest neighbors are `competition`, `coevolution`, `adverse_selection`. COLLISION/GENUS RISK: the genus `arms_race` / `red_queen_dynamics` is itself ABSENT from corpus — this stub may be a domain instance of a missing parent. STATUS: HOLD — pending owner curation."
- "Created 2026-07-03; STUB ONLY (frontmatter + Core Idea + Notes). Did NOT go through Phase-A triage. SI/SF/similarity grades are PROPOSER ESTIMATES pending triangulation. Body sections (Structural Signature onward) NOT yet written."
- "Phase-C action: re-similarity check vs `information_asymmetry`, `costly_signaling`/`signaling` (if present), `competition`, `coevolution`, `red_queen`/`arms_race` (absent), and `positional_goods`/`winner_take_all_market`, to decide whether to keep the specific signaling instance or hold the genus. At incorporation draw the derived-from edge to `information_asymmetry` and a genus edge to the escalation/arms-race parent once it exists. Per CLAUDE.md, sync one_liner to a v1 draft before merge."
substrate_independence:
  composite_substrate_independence: 4
  domain_breadth: 4
  structural_abstraction: 4
  transfer_evidence: 4
  reasoning: 'The core structure — agents invest in a costly, relative signal; each investment is neutralized by rivals matching it; so the equilibrium cost ratchets upward while relative position is preserved — is a genuine dynamical pattern statable without domain vocabulary, so structural_abstraction is 4 (it is not a full 5 only because "signal" and "cost" carry a mild theory-of-signaling flavor). It recurs across evident substrates: peacock tails and antlers in sexual selection, host-parasite and predator-prey escalation in coevolution, weapons build-ups in military strategy, credential and advertising escalation in markets, and status-consumption spirals — domain_breadth 4. Transfer is well documented under the Red Queen / arms-race and Zahavian handicap literatures, which explicitly move the same model between biology and economics, so transfer_evidence is 4. Composite 4: a strongly substrate-independent escalation dynamic whose home vocabulary (costly signaling) is thin but not zero.'
similarity_to_nearest_existing_prime:
  slug: information_asymmetry
  similarity: 0.55
structural_framed:
  label: mixed-structural
  aggregate: 0.3
  criteria: {vocab_travels: 0.4, evaluative_weight: 0.1, institutional_origin: 0.3, human_practice_bound: 0.2, import_vs_recognize: 0.4}
  rationale: 'Mostly structural with a thin frame. The escalation dynamic — matched costly investment neutralizes itself, ratcheting cost without changing relative rank — is a medium-neutral positive-feedback pattern that recurs in biology with no human in the loop (antler size, Red Queen coevolution), which pushes human_practice_bound and evaluative_weight low. The residual frame is the "signaling" vocabulary (a term of art from Spence/Zahavi that one mildly imports) and its origin in signaling theory, so vocab_travels and import_vs_recognize sit near 0.4. Net aggregate ~0.3: a structural escalation dynamic wearing a light signaling-theory coat.'
phase_b_passes_completed: []
---
# Signaling Arms Race

## Core Idea

A signaling arms race is the dynamic in which agents invest in a *costly, purely relative* signal, each agent's investment is *neutralized by rivals matching or exceeding it*, and the equilibrium level of investment therefore *ratchets upward without end* while *relative position is preserved* — everyone pays more and no one gains lasting ground. It is the escalation-pole dual of `information_asymmetry`. Information asymmetry names the *static* condition: one party holds material private knowledge the other cannot cheaply observe, and the structure sits still until a mechanism compresses, reveals, or aligns around the gap. A signaling arms race names what happens when the mechanism that closes the gap — *costly signaling*, in which the informed party burns resources on a display credible precisely because it is expensive — is itself *competitive and relative*: because the signal must distinguish its sender from rivals, any level a rival can match stops distinguishing, so each round of investment provokes an answering round, and the very act of closing the informational gap becomes the engine of an unbounded cost spiral. The axis is *static gap versus escalating closure*: same underlying asymmetry, but one prime freezes it and the other lets the remedy run away with itself.

The load-bearing invariants are four, and all four must hold. First, a *relative-not-absolute payoff*: what an agent gains depends on its signal *compared to rivals'*, not on the signal's absolute level — this is what makes any matched investment self-cancelling. Second, *costliness*: the signal consumes real resources, which is what makes the escalation a genuine loss rather than a harmless bidding-up. Third, *reciprocal response*: rivals observe and match, so investment is met with counter-investment (the positive-feedback loop). Fourth, *rank-preservation at the new cost floor*: after a round of matching, relative standing is roughly where it began but everyone has paid more — the diagnostic fingerprint that separates an arms race from ordinary competition that resolves. The characteristic payoff is that a *credible* signal survives — the escalation does communicate hidden quality, because only the genuinely-able can afford the top of the spiral (the handicap principle). The characteristic cost is *collective dissipation*: the resources poured into out-signaling are, at the group level, pure waste, since relative position is a zero-sum quantity and the spiral would leave everyone better off if it could be capped — a commons/coordination failure sitting inside the individual-rationality of each escalation. The prime is the clean statement of that trade: individually rational signal-matching produces a collectively wasteful, self-perpetuating cost ratchet that nonetheless keeps the signal honest.

Read as one pattern across substrates, the signaling arms race is *the Red Queen running in a cost dimension*. In **evolutionary biology** it is the runaway of sexually-selected ornaments — peacock tails, antlers, birdsong — where each generation's display is only meaningful relative to rivals', so ornaments inflate until natural-selection costs cap them (Zahavi's handicap; Fisherian runaway). In **military strategy** it is the classic arms race: each power's buildup neutralizes the other's, security is unchanged, and both are poorer. In **markets** it is credential inflation, the advertising spend war, and the patent or algorithm race, where competitors' matched investment leaves relative share intact and total spend inflated. In **social status** it is conspicuous-consumption spirals and positional-goods competition. Across all of them the recognizable move is the same: a costly, relative, mutually-observed signal whose matching neutralizes it, driving cost upward while rank stands still.

## Notes

**Provenance.** Produced by the op-01 dualization operator (sub-flavor 1c) as the escalation/dynamic dual of `information_asymmetry` along the static-gap-vs-escalating-closure axis. The operator's route runs input asymmetry → its standard remedy (costly signaling) → what happens when that remedy is competitive and relative (the runaway). Convergence signal is moderate: the pattern is independently canonical under two literatures (Red Queen / arms race in biology; costly-signaling escalation in economics), which is corroboration of the structure but also the source of the genus-hold risk below.

**For owner evaluation (keep/cut).** The case FOR: it is a distinctive, well-attested dynamical pattern with a sharp fingerprint (self-cancelling matched investment + rank-preservation at a rising cost floor) that is not captured by any current prime — `competition` is the broad genus but does not entail escalation or self-cancellation; `information_asymmetry` is the static condition, not the spiral; `coevolution` is adjacent but broader and not signal-specific. It also completes a genuine static/dynamic pair with the input prime. The specific risks the owner must weigh, all flagged in the manifest:
  - *Missing-genus risk (the load-bearing one).* The manifest explicitly notes that `arms_race` / `red_queen_dynamics` is **absent from the corpus**. The escalation structure — matched investment neutralizes itself, cost ratchets, relative position holds — is fully general and does **not** require the "signal" content; military and predator-prey arms races run it with no signaling in the Spence/Zahavi sense. The owner should decide whether to (a) admit `signaling_arms_race` as the concrete signaling instance, (b) hold the genus `arms_race` / `red_queen_dynamics` instead, or (c) hold both, with signaling_arms_race as a child. Option (b) or (c) looks structurally cleaner: the traveling structure is the arms race; signaling is one substrate.
  - *Domain-instance risk.* Even granting the pattern, "signaling" pins it to signaling theory; the SF read (~0.3, mixed-structural) reflects that the escalation is structural but the label imports a term of art. The genus is more substrate-neutral.
  - *Screen overlap.* Re-check against `positional_goods` / `winner_take_all_market` (relative-payoff kin), `costly_signaling`/`signaling` if either exists, and `tragedy_of_the_commons` / coordination-failure primes (the collective-waste half of the trade). Part of this prime's content is a commons failure and may be better drawn as an edge than duplicated.
  - *Lattice signal.* Genuine static/dynamic pair-completion with `information_asymmetry`, and a genus gap (`arms_race`) sitting one level up — both are reasons to act, but they point at *different* incorporations.

**At incorporation.** Re-run similarity vs `information_asymmetry`, `competition`, `coevolution`, `positional_goods`/`winner_take_all_market`, and any `signaling`/`costly_signaling` and `red_queen`/`arms_race` slugs (the last two currently absent — check again in case they land first). Decide genus-vs-instance before drawing edges: if the genus is admitted, this becomes its child (draw the is-a edge) and the derived-from edge to `information_asymmetry` moves to the genus; if kept standalone, draw the derived-from/dual edge to `information_asymmetry` and a compose edge to the commons/coordination-failure prime for the collective-waste half. Per CLAUDE.md, write the v1 draft and sync `one_liner` across v1 and v2 in the same commit before merge.
