Is there a general name for the setup in which payoffs are not known exactly but players try to influence each other's perception of the payoffs? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InOsborne, Nash equilibria and the correctness of beliefsIs there a name for this family of games (Binomial games?)?Perfect Bayesian EquilibriumCalculating mixed strategy equilibrium in battle of sexesPure Strategy SPNEIs there a commitment mechanism which allows players to achieve pareto optimal solutions?Extensive Form GamesAn $n$-player prisoner's dilemma where a coalition of 2 players is better off defectingTit-For-Stat Strategy Best RepliesPotential solutions of the $n$-player Prisoner's Dilemma
If I can cast sorceries at instant speed, can I use sorcery-speed activated abilities at instant speed?
ODD NUMBER in Cognitive Linguistics of WILLIAM CROFT and D. ALAN CRUSE
Old scifi movie from the 50s or 60s with men in solid red uniforms who interrogate a spy from the past
Kerning for subscripts of sigma?
How do I free up internal storage if I don't have any apps downloaded?
How to obtain a position of last non-zero element
I am an eight letter word. What am I?
If I score a critical hit on an 18 or higher, what are my chances of getting a critical hit if I roll 3d20?
Slides for 30 min~1 hr Skype tenure track application interview
Is an up-to-date browser secure on an out-of-date OS?
APIPA and LAN Broadcast Domain
What is the most efficient way to store a numeric range?
"as much details as you can remember"
How to translate "being like"?
Does adding complexity mean a more secure cipher?
Relationship between Gromov-Witten and Taubes' Gromov invariant
Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?
What does Linus Torvalds mean when he says that Git "never ever" tracks a file?
Geography at the pixel level
Why are there uneven bright areas in this photo of black hole?
writing variables above the numbers in tikz picture
Did any laptop computers have a built-in 5 1/4 inch floppy drive?
Why couldn't they take pictures of a closer black hole?
Correct punctuation for showing a character's confusion
Is there a general name for the setup in which payoffs are not known exactly but players try to influence each other's perception of the payoffs?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InOsborne, Nash equilibria and the correctness of beliefsIs there a name for this family of games (Binomial games?)?Perfect Bayesian EquilibriumCalculating mixed strategy equilibrium in battle of sexesPure Strategy SPNEIs there a commitment mechanism which allows players to achieve pareto optimal solutions?Extensive Form GamesAn $n$-player prisoner's dilemma where a coalition of 2 players is better off defectingTit-For-Stat Strategy Best RepliesPotential solutions of the $n$-player Prisoner's Dilemma
$begingroup$
A recent question elsewhere made me look at the "madman strategy" which actually consists of trying to make the opposite player think that he is playing a game of chicken instead of prisoner's dilemma. This can only work, of course, because in reality the payoffs are not known apriori, so an inversion of the non-cooperation payoff with the "tentation" payoff does this game switch.
Is there a general name for a "meta-game" (my term) situation in which the payoffs are not known exactly and players are trying to influence each others' perception of the payoffs?
game-theory terminology
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A recent question elsewhere made me look at the "madman strategy" which actually consists of trying to make the opposite player think that he is playing a game of chicken instead of prisoner's dilemma. This can only work, of course, because in reality the payoffs are not known apriori, so an inversion of the non-cooperation payoff with the "tentation" payoff does this game switch.
Is there a general name for a "meta-game" (my term) situation in which the payoffs are not known exactly and players are trying to influence each others' perception of the payoffs?
game-theory terminology
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A recent question elsewhere made me look at the "madman strategy" which actually consists of trying to make the opposite player think that he is playing a game of chicken instead of prisoner's dilemma. This can only work, of course, because in reality the payoffs are not known apriori, so an inversion of the non-cooperation payoff with the "tentation" payoff does this game switch.
Is there a general name for a "meta-game" (my term) situation in which the payoffs are not known exactly and players are trying to influence each others' perception of the payoffs?
game-theory terminology
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
$endgroup$
A recent question elsewhere made me look at the "madman strategy" which actually consists of trying to make the opposite player think that he is playing a game of chicken instead of prisoner's dilemma. This can only work, of course, because in reality the payoffs are not known apriori, so an inversion of the non-cooperation payoff with the "tentation" payoff does this game switch.
Is there a general name for a "meta-game" (my term) situation in which the payoffs are not known exactly and players are trying to influence each others' perception of the payoffs?
game-theory terminology
game-theory terminology
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
asked yesterday
FizzFizz
603313
603313
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What players are trying to do is always up for interpretation, it is not coded into the mathematics of game theory.
The madman strategy can be modelled as a Bayesian game, with different types having different payoffs, and one player sending a signal about their type, the other player observing the signal. A situation in which types are indistinguishable based on their signals is called a pooling equilibrium.
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "591"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2feconomics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f27722%2fis-there-a-general-name-for-the-setup-in-which-payoffs-are-not-known-exactly-but%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
What players are trying to do is always up for interpretation, it is not coded into the mathematics of game theory.
The madman strategy can be modelled as a Bayesian game, with different types having different payoffs, and one player sending a signal about their type, the other player observing the signal. A situation in which types are indistinguishable based on their signals is called a pooling equilibrium.
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What players are trying to do is always up for interpretation, it is not coded into the mathematics of game theory.
The madman strategy can be modelled as a Bayesian game, with different types having different payoffs, and one player sending a signal about their type, the other player observing the signal. A situation in which types are indistinguishable based on their signals is called a pooling equilibrium.
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What players are trying to do is always up for interpretation, it is not coded into the mathematics of game theory.
The madman strategy can be modelled as a Bayesian game, with different types having different payoffs, and one player sending a signal about their type, the other player observing the signal. A situation in which types are indistinguishable based on their signals is called a pooling equilibrium.
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
$endgroup$
What players are trying to do is always up for interpretation, it is not coded into the mathematics of game theory.
The madman strategy can be modelled as a Bayesian game, with different types having different payoffs, and one player sending a signal about their type, the other player observing the signal. A situation in which types are indistinguishable based on their signals is called a pooling equilibrium.
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered yesterday
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
13.6k32248
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
I've accepted your answer but I do ponder if the assumption of nature move establishing the players' types (and with a common prior knowledge of those type assignment probabilities) is really capturing all I'm asking about. I'm guessing that players sending each other signals about their types prior to playing the actual game make this a 3-step game (instead of just nature move followed by a static game).
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
$begingroup$
Actually it looks like the narrowest fitting type is called signalling game, although in that one only one of the players (the "sender") chooses [and sends] a message after being dealt a type by nature.
$endgroup$
– Fizz
yesterday
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Economics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2feconomics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f27722%2fis-there-a-general-name-for-the-setup-in-which-payoffs-are-not-known-exactly-but%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
