IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v86y2019i1d10.1007_s11238-018-9679-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Robust program equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Caspar Oesterheld

    (Foundational Research Institute
    Duke University)

Abstract

One approach to achieving cooperation in the one-shot prisoner’s dilemma is Tennenholtz’s (Games Econ Behav 49(2):363–373, 2004) program equilibrium, in which the players of a game submit programs instead of strategies. These programs are then allowed to read each other’s source code to decide which action to take. As shown by Tennenholtz, cooperation is played in an equilibrium of this alternative game. In particular, he proposes that the two players submit the same version of the following program: cooperate if the opponent is an exact copy of this program and defect otherwise. Neither of the two players can benefit from submitting a different program. Unfortunately, this equilibrium is fragile and unlikely to be realized in practice. We thus propose a new, simple program to achieve more robust cooperative program equilibria: cooperate with some small probability $$\epsilon $$ ϵ and otherwise act as the opponent acts against this program. I argue that this program is similar to the tit for tat strategy for the iterated prisoner’s dilemma. Both “start” by cooperating and copy their opponent’s behavior from “the last round”. We then generalize this approach of turning strategies for the repeated version of a game into programs for the one-shot version of a game to other two-player games. We prove that the resulting programs inherit properties of the underlying strategy. This enables them to robustly and effectively elicit the same responses as the underlying strategy for the repeated game.

Suggested Citation

  • Caspar Oesterheld, 2019. "Robust program equilibrium," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 143-159, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:86:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11238-018-9679-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-018-9679-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11238-018-9679-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-018-9679-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Binmore, Ken, 1987. "Modeling Rational Players: Part I," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 179-214, October.
    2. Binmore, Ken, 1988. "Modeling Rational Players: Part II," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 9-55, April.
    3. Wiebe Hoek & Cees Witteveen & Michael Wooldridge, 2013. "Program equilibrium—a program reasoning approach," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 639-671, August.
    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. Yoav Kolumbus & Joe Halpern & 'Eva Tardos, 2024. "Paying to Do Better: Games with Payments between Learning Agents," Papers 2405.20880, arXiv.org.

    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. R. M. Harstad & R. Selten, 2014. "Bounded-rationality models:tasks to become intellectually competitive," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 5.
    2. Van Damme, Eric, 2002. "Strategic equilibrium," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 41, pages 1521-1596, Elsevier.
    3. Haruvy, Ernan & Stahl, Dale O., 2007. "Equilibrium selection and bounded rationality in symmetric normal-form games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 98-119, January.
    4. Sent, Esther-Mirjam, 2004. "The legacy of Herbert Simon in game theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 303-317, March.
    5. GOSSNER, Olivier, 1998. "Repeated games played by cryptographically sophisticated players," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1998035, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Ho, Teck-Hua, 1996. "Finite automata play repeated prisoner's dilemma with information processing costs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-3), pages 173-207.
    7. Benjamin Patrick Evans & Mikhail Prokopenko, 2021. "Bounded rationality for relaxing best response and mutual consistency: The Quantal Hierarchy model of decision-making," Papers 2106.15844, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    8. Alexandra Oprea, 2019. "Democracy as a Game of Trust: The Limits of Generality Constraints," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 227-248, December.
    9. Hubie Chen, 2013. "Bounded rationality, strategy simplification, and equilibrium," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 593-611, August.
    10. Lorenzo Sacconi, 2013. "Ethics, economic organization and the social contract," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Jean-Pierre Dupuy, 1989. "Convention et Common knowledge," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 40(2), pages 361-400.
    12. Marek Mikolaj Kaminski, 2019. "Generalized Backward Induction: Justification for a Folk Algorithm," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-25, August.
    13. Robin Cubitt & Robert Sugden, 2005. "Common reasoning in games: a resolution of the paradoxes of ‘common knowledge of rationality’," Discussion Papers 2005-17, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    14. Gagen, Michael, 2013. "Isomorphic Strategy Spaces in Game Theory," MPRA Paper 46176, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Abhimanyu Khan & Ronald Peeters, 2014. "Cognitive hierarchies in adaptive play," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(4), pages 903-924, November.
    16. John Hillas & Elon Kohlberg, 1996. "Foundations of Strategic Equilibrium," Game Theory and Information 9606002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Sep 1996.
    17. Cubitt, Robin P. & Sugden, Robert, 2014. "Common Reasoning In Games: A Lewisian Analysis Of Common Knowledge Of Rationality," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 285-329, November.
    18. Robin P. Cubitt & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Common reasoning in games," Discussion Papers 2008-01, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    19. Marini, Annalisa, 2016. "Cultural Beliefs, Values and Economics: A Survey," MPRA Paper 69747, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hannu Nurmi, 1993. "Problems in the Theory of Institutional Design," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(4), pages 523-540, October.

    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:kap:theord:v:86:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s11238-018-9679-3. 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: 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.