Is there a general name for the setup in which payoffs are not known exactly but players try to influence...
$begingroup$
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 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
$endgroup$
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 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
$endgroup$
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 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
$endgroup$
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 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
asked 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
asked 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
asked 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
asked 2 days ago
FizzFizz
608313
608313
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 2 days ago
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
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 2 days ago
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
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 2 days ago
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
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 2 days ago
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 2 days ago
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered 2 days ago
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered 2 days ago
GiskardGiskard
13.6k32248
answered 2 days ago
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
This is possible in Bayesian games, there can be many steps. For an example see Kuhn poker.
$endgroup$
– Giskard
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
$begingroup$
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
2 days ago
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
