IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joptap/v172y2017i3d10.1007_s10957-016-1034-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redefinition of Belief Distorted Nash Equilibria for the Environment of Dynamic Games with Probabilistic Beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel

    (University of Warsaw)

Abstract

In this paper, a new concept of equilibrium in dynamic games with incomplete or distorted information is introduced. In the games considered, players have incomplete information about crucial aspects of the game and formulate beliefs about the probabilities of various future scenarios. The concept of belief distorted Nash equilibrium combines optimization based on given beliefs and self-verification of those beliefs. Existence and equivalence theorems are proven, and this concept is compared to existing ones. Theoretical results are illustrated using several examples: extracting a common renewable resource, a large minority game, and a repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma.

Suggested Citation

  • Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2017. "Redefinition of Belief Distorted Nash Equilibria for the Environment of Dynamic Games with Probabilistic Beliefs," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 984-1007, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joptap:v:172:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10957-016-1034-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10957-016-1034-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10957-016-1034-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10957-016-1034-7?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. Rubinstein Ariel & Wolinsky Asher, 1994. "Rationalizable Conjectural Equilibrium: Between Nash and Rationalizability," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 299-311, March.
    2. Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, Agnieszka, 2014. "When Beliefs About Future Create Future - Exploitation of a Common Ecosystem from a New Perspective," Strategic Behavior and the Environment, now publishers, vol. 4(3), pages 237-261, August.
    3. Łukasz Balbus & Paweł Dziewulski & Kevin Reffett & Łukasz Woźny, 2015. "Differential information in large games with strategic complementarities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 59(1), pages 201-243, May.
    4. Carmona, Guilherme & Podczeck, Konrad, 2009. "On the existence of pure-strategy equilibria in large games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1300-1319, May.
    5. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David K, 1993. "Self-Confirming Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 523-545, May.
    6. Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1995. "Subjective games and equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 123-163.
    7. W. Brian Arthur, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning, Bounded Rationality and the Bar Problem," Working Papers 94-03-014, Santa Fe Institute.
    8. Battigalli Pierpaolo & Siniscalchi Marciano, 2003. "Rationalization and Incomplete Information," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-46, June.
    9. Aumann, Robert J., 1974. "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
    10. Mas-Colell, Andreu, 1984. "On a theorem of Schmeidler," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 201-206, December.
    11. Arthur, W Brian, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 406-411, May.
    12. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1973. "Equilibrium points of nonatomic games," LIDAM Reprints CORE 146, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    13. Balder, Erik J, 1995. "A Unifying Approach to Existence of Nash Equilibrium," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 24(1), pages 79-94.
    14. Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2016. "Belief distorted Nash equilibria: introduction of a new kind of equilibrium in dynamic games with distorted information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 243(1), pages 147-177, August.
    15. Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2014. "Open and Closed Loop Nash Equilibria in Games with a Continuum of Players," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 280-301, January.
    16. Yaron Azrieli, 2009. "On pure conjectural equilibrium with non-manipulable information," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 38(2), pages 209-219, June.
    17. Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, Agnieszka, 2005. "Stock market as a dynamic game with continuum of players," MPRA Paper 32982, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2006.
    18. John C. Harsanyi, 1967. "Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III Part I. The Basic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 159-182, November.
    19. Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1993. "Subjective Equilibrium in Repeated Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1231-1240, September.
    20. Battigalli, Pierpaolo, 2003. "Rationalizability in infinite, dynamic games with incomplete information," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 1-38, March.
    21. Edward Cartwright & Myrna Wooders, 2014. "Correlated Equilibrium, Conformity, and Stereotyping in Social Groups," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(5), pages 743-766, October.
    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. Mathew P. Abraham & Ankur A. Kulkarni, 2019. "New results on the existence of open loop Nash equilibria in discrete time dynamic games via generalized Nash games," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 89(2), pages 157-172, April.
    2. Katarzyna Kańska & Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2022. "Dynamic Stackelberg duopoly with sticky prices and a myopic follower," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 4221-4252, September.

    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. Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2016. "Belief distorted Nash equilibria: introduction of a new kind of equilibrium in dynamic games with distorted information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 243(1), pages 147-177, August.
    2. Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone & Maccheroni, Fabio & Schmeidler, David, 2022. "Equilibria of nonatomic anonymous games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 110-131.
    3. Camacho, Carmen & Kamihigashi, Takashi & Sağlam, Çağrı, 2018. "Robust comparative statics for non-monotone shocks in large aggregative games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 288-299.
    4. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    5. Kalai, Ehud & Shmaya, Eran, 2018. "Large strategic dynamic interactions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 59-81.
    6. Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1995. "Subjective games and equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 123-163.
    7. Battigalli Pierpaolo & Siniscalchi Marciano, 2003. "Rationalization and Incomplete Information," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-46, June.
    8. Pierpaolo Battigalli & Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci, 2015. "Self-Confirming Equilibrium and Model Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 646-677, February.
    9. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Corrao, Roberto & Dufwenberg, Martin, 2019. "Incorporating belief-dependent motivation in games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 185-218.
    10. Azrieli, Yaron, 2007. "Thinking categorically about others: A conjectural equilibrium approach," MPRA Paper 3843, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and game theory. A 70th anniversary," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 1-7.
    12. Gilli, Mario, 1999. "On Non-Nash Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 184-203, May.
    13. Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2014. "Open and Closed Loop Nash Equilibria in Games with a Continuum of Players," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 160(1), pages 280-301, January.
    14. Yoo, Seung Han, 2014. "Learning a population distribution," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 188-201.
    15. Mario Gilli, 2002. "Rational Learning in Imperfect Monitoring Games," Working Papers 46, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2002.
    16. 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.
    17. Battigalli, P. & Cerreia-Vioglio, S. & Maccheroni, F. & Marinacci, M., 2016. "Analysis of information feedback and selfconfirming equilibrium," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 40-51.
    18. Joseph Greenberg, 2000. "The Right to Remain Silent," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 193-204, March.
    19. Sobel, Joel, 2000. "Economists' Models of Learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 241-261, October.
    20. Oury, Marion, 2015. "Continuous implementation with local payoff uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 656-677.

    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:joptap:v:172:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s10957-016-1034-7. 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.