Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userGame Theory with Translucent Players
134
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Burkhard C. Schipper
Publication date
2013
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
A traditional assumption in game theory is that players are opaque to one another -- if a player changes strategies, then this change in strategies does not affect the choice of other players strategies. In many situations this is an unrealistic assumption. We develop a framework for reasoning about games where the players may be translucent to one another; in particular, a player may believe that if she were to change strategies, then the other player would also change strategies. Translucent players may achieve significantly more efficient outcomes than opaque ones. Our main result is a characterization of strategies consistent with appropriate analogues of common belief of rationality. Common Counterfactual Belief of Rationality (CCBR) holds if (1) everyone is rational, (2) everyone counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational (i.e., all players i believe that everyone else would still be rational even if i were to switch strategies), (3) everyone counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational, and counterfactually believes that everyone else is rational, and so on. CCBR characterizes the set of strategies surviving iterated removal of minimax dominated strategies: a strategy $sigma_i$ is minimax dominated for i if there exists a strategy $sigma_i$ for i such that $min_{mu_{-i}} u_i(sigma_i, mu_{-i}) > max_{mu_{-i}} u_i(sigma_i, mu_{-i})$.
rate research
Read More
In the last few decades, numerous experiments have shown that humans do not always behave so as to maximize their material payoff. Cooperative behavior when non-cooperation is a dominant strategy (with respect to the material payoffs) is particularly puzzling. Here we propose a novel approach to explain cooperation, assuming what Halpern and Pass call translucent players. Typically, players are assumed to be opaque, in the sense that a deviation by one player in a normal-form game does not affect the strategies used by other players. But a player may believe that if he switches from one strategy to another, the fact that he chooses to switch may be visible to the other players. For example, if he chooses to defect in Prisoners Dilemma, the other player may sense his guilt. We show that by assuming translucent players, we can recover many of the regularities observed in human behavior in well-studied games such as Prisoners Dilemma, Travelers Dilemma, Bertrand Competition, and the Public Goods game.
We present the first game characterization of contrasimilarity, the weakest form of bisimilarity. The game is finite for finite-state processes and can thus be used for contrasimulation equivalence checking, of which no tool has been capable to date. A machine-checked Isabelle/HOL formalization backs our work and enables further use of contrasimilarity in verification contexts.
We revisit the crucial issue of natural game equivalences, and semantics of game logics based on these. We present reasons for investigating finer concepts of game equivalence than equality of standard powers, though staying short of modal bisimulation. Concretely, we propose a more finegrained notion of equality of basic powers which record what players can force plus what they leave to others to do, a crucial feature of interaction. This notion is closer to game-theoretic strategic form, as we explain in detail, while remaining amenable to logical analysis. We determine the properties of basic powers via a new representation theorem, find a matching instantial neighborhood game logic, and show how our analysis can be extended to a new game algebra and dynamic game logic.
A dataset has been classified by some unknown classifier into two types of points. What were the most important factors in determining the classification outcome? In this work, we employ an axiomatic approach in order to uniquely characterize an influence measure: a function that, given a set of classified points, outputs a value for each feature corresponding to its influence in determining the classification outcome. We show that our influence measure takes on an intuitive form when the unknown classifier is linear. Finally, we employ our influence measure in order to analyze the effects of user profiling on Googles online display advertising.
In 1974 E.W. Dijkstra introduced the seminal concept of self-stabilization that turned out to be one of the main approaches to fault-tolerant computing. We show here how his three solutions can be formalized and reasoned about using the concepts of game theory. We also determine the precise number of steps needed to reach self-stabilization in his first solution.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
