IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-04c70019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equivalence between best responses and undominated strategies: a generalization from finite to compact strategy sets

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Zimper

    (University of Mannheim)

Abstract

For games with expected utility maximizing players whose strategy sets are finite, Pearce (1984) shows that a strategy is strictly dominated by some mixed strategy, if and only if, this strategy is not a best response to some belief about opponents' strategy choice. This note generalizes Pearce''s (1984) equivalence result to games with expected utility maximizing players whose strategy sets are arbitrary compact sets.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Zimper, 2005. "Equivalence between best responses and undominated strategies: a generalization from finite to compact strategy sets," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(7), pages 1-6.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-04c70019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/pubs/EB/2005/Volume3/EB-04C70019A.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. Guesnerie, 2002. "Anchoring Economic Predictions in Common Knowledge," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 439-480, March.
    2. Moulin, Herve, 1984. "Dominance solvability and cournot stability," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 83-102, February.
    3. Ghirardato, Paolo & Le Breton, Michel, 2000. "Choquet Rationality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 277-285, February.
    4. Pearce, David G, 1984. "Rationalizable Strategic Behavior and the Problem of Perfection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 1029-1050, July.
    5. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "Rationalizability, Learning, and Equilibrium in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(6), pages 1255-1277, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Damianov, Damian S. & Becker, Johannes Gerd, 2010. "Auctions with variable supply: Uniform price versus discriminatory," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 571-593, May.
    2. Sudhir A. Shah, 2023. "General dualities between best replies and undominated actions," Working papers 337, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    3. Michael Trost, 2014. "On the Equivalence between Iterated Application of Choice Rules and Common Belief of Applying these Rules," Jena Economics Research Papers 2014-032, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Bulat Gafarov & Bruno Salcedo, 2015. "Ordinal dominance and risk aversion," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 287-298, October.
    5. Tijmen Daniëls, 2008. "Pure strategy dominance with quasiconcave utility functions," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(54), pages 1-8.
    6. Trost, Michael, 2019. "On the equivalence between iterated application of choice rules and common belief of applying these rules," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 1-37.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zimper, Alexander, 2005. "Equivalence between best responses and undominated," Papers 05-08, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    2. Zimper, Alexander, 2004. "Dominance-solvable lattice games," Papers 04-18, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    3. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2005:i:7:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Zimper, Alexander, 2006. "Uniqueness conditions for strongly point-rationalizable solutions to games with metrizable strategy sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 729-751, September.
    5. Jara-Moroni, Pedro, 2012. "Rationalizability in games with a continuum of players," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 668-684.
    6. Zimper, Alexander, 2004. "On the Existence of Strategic Solutions for Games with Security- and Potential Level Players," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 04-04, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    7. Alexander Zimper, 2007. "Strategic games with security and potential level players," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 53-78, August.
    8. Roger Guesnerie & Pedro Jara-Moroni, 2007. "Expectational coordination in a class of economic models: Strategic substitutabilities versus strategic complementarities," PSE Working Papers halshs-00587837, HAL.
    9. Takuya Iimura & Toshimasa Maruta & Takahiro Watanabe, 2020. "Two-person pairwise solvable games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 49(2), pages 385-409, June.
    10. Xiao Luo & Xuewen Qian & Chen Qu, 2020. "Iterated elimination procedures," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(2), pages 437-465, September.
    11. Roger Guesnerie & Pedro Jara-Moroni, 2011. "Expectational coordination in simple economic contexts," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 47(2), pages 205-246, June.
    12. Battigalli, Pierpaolo, 2003. "Rationalizability in infinite, dynamic games with incomplete information," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 1-38, March.
    13. Alexander Zimper, 2006. "A Note On The Equivalence Of Rationalizability Concepts In Generalized Nice Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 669-674.
    14. Roger Guesnerie, 2005. "Strategic Substitutabilities Versus Strategic Complementarities : Towards a General Theory of Expectational Coordination ?," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 115(4), pages 393-412.
    15. Roger Guesnerie, 2009. "Macroeconomic and Monetary Policies from the Eductive Viewpoint," Central Banking, Analysis, and Economic Policies Book Series, in: Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel & Carl E. Walsh & Norman Loayza (Series Editor) & Klaus Schmidt-Hebbel (Series (ed.),Monetary Policy under Uncertainty and Learning, edition 1, volume 13, chapter 6, pages 171-202, Central Bank of Chile.
    16. Alexander Zimper, 2007. "A fixed point characterization of the dominance-solvability of lattice games with strategic substitutes," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 36(1), pages 107-117, September.
    17. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo, 2012. "An indistinguishability result on rationalizability under general preferences," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(1), pages 1-12, September.
    18. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo & Chen Qu, 2016. "Rationalizability in general situations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 147-167, January.
    19. Chen, Yi-Chun & Long, Ngo Van & Luo, Xiao, 2007. "Iterated strict dominance in general games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 299-315, November.
    20. Jonathan Weinstein & Muhamet Yildiz, 2004. "Finite-Order Implications of Any Equilibrium," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000065, David K. Levine.
    21. Zimper, Alexander, 2003. "Uniqueness conditions for point-rationalizable solutions of games with metrizable strategy sets," Papers 03-28, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C7 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory

    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:ebl:ecbull:eb-04c70019. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.