IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jogath/v27y1998i1p147-156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Note Perfect folk theorems. Does public randomization matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Wojciech Olszewski

    (Dept. of Econ., Warsaw Univ., ul. Dluga 44/50, 00-241 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

I consider two player games, where player 1 can use only pure strategies, and player 2 can use mixed strategies. I indicate a class of such games with the property that under public randomization both the discounted and the undiscounted finitely repeated perfect folk theorems do hold, but the discounted theorem does not without public randomization. Further, I show that the class contains games such that without public randomization the undiscounted theorem does not hold, as well as games such that without public randomization the undiscounted theorem does hold.

Suggested Citation

  • Wojciech Olszewski, 1998. "Note Perfect folk theorems. Does public randomization matter?," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 27(1), pages 147-156.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:27:y:1998:i:1:p:147-156
    Note: Received March 1996/Revised version 1997
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00182/papers/8027001/80270147.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gonzalez-Diaz, Julio, 2006. "Finitely repeated games: A generalized Nash folk theorem," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 100-111, April.
    2. Ani Dasgupta & Sambuddha Ghosh, 2017. "Repeated Games Without Public Randomization: A Constructive Approach," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2017-011, Boston University - Department of Economics, revised Feb 2019.
    3. Dasgupta, Ani & Ghosh, Sambuddha, 2022. "Self-accessibility and repeated games with asymmetric discounting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    4. Yuichi Yamamoto, 2010. "The use of public randomization in discounted repeated games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 39(3), pages 431-443, July.
    5. Bo Chen & Satoru Fujishige, 2013. "On the feasible payoff set of two-player repeated games with unequal discounting," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(1), pages 295-303, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jogath:v:27:y:1998:i:1:p:147-156. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.