Game Theory Classes
- A Game Theory Based Predation Behavior 2008 Chen Shi
- ingredients: players, strategies, payoffs
- simple collection active game
- team games -> ultimate competition
- Optimal Strategy to Solution Concepts
- Decision theory, single theory
- Cournot-Nash -- what pushes people towards equilibrium?
- Nash equilibrium with many players. Keynes' Beauty Contest Game.
- Braess' Paradox; traffic game
- Tragedy of the Commons
- Minimax Theorem
- best response correspondences
- finite number of pure strategies -> has at least one nash equilibrium
- Palacios-Huerta & Volij (2009 American Economic Review)
Extensive Form Games
- perfect vs. imperfect information (game tree)
- game tree: root node, terminal nodes. Easy to understand but has cumbersome notation -- "a lot of notation to specify the obvious"
- off path strategies
- mixed strategies vs. behavioral strategies (Kuhn's Theorem) -- doesn't matter for perfect information
- centipede game (R. McKelvey and T. Palfrey)
- unique backward induction
- entry game
- information sets
- subgame perfect equilibrium (include all children)
- Many interactions occur more than once
- Tit-for-tat Axelrod prisoner's dilemma
- finite: always defect, but people tend to play as if it was indefinite
- the stage game
- limit average rewards; future-discounted reward
- grim trigger
- P. Dal Bo American Economic Review vol 95, repeated
- "Folk" Theorems
Bayesian Games and Auctions
- Dan Friedman of Learning and Experimental Economics (LEEPS). A continuous dilemma.
- Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, with article on Case-Based Reasoning, Social Dilemmas, and a New Equilibrium Concept.
- Adam Kalai
- Algorithmic Game Theory by Nisan
- A Course in Game Theory by Osborne (available on NetLibrary)
- Game Theory: A Nontechnical Introduction by Morton D. Davis
- Prisoner's Dilemma by William Poundstone
- Games and Decisions: Introduction and Critical Survey by R. Duncan Luce (at DH Hill,
- Game Theory: A Nontechnical Introduction by Morton D. Davis.
- One-Person games are really a player against "nature". These games can be broken down into three categories.
I believe that there is asymmetry in winning versus losing positions.
- "If you have nothing to lose, you can try everything" -- Yiddish Proverb
3:2 0:3 Win, Lose 2 (1/3) (33.3) 1:2 Win, Tie 3 (1/6) (16.7) 2:1 Win, Win 4 (1/6) (16.7) 3:0 Tie, Win 3 (1/3) (33.3) 12 4:1 0:3 Win, Lose 2 (1/3) (33.3) 1:2 Win, Lose 2 (1/6) (16.7) 2:1 Win, Tie 3 (1/6) (16.7) 3:0 Win, Win 4 (1/3) (33.3) 11