IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oxf/wpaper/148.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Algorithmic Characterization of Rationalizability in Extensive Form Games

Author

Listed:
  • Oliver Board

Abstract

We construct a dynamic epistemic model for extensive form games, which generates a hierarchy of beliefs for each player over her opponents` strategies and beliefs, and tells us how those beliefs will be revised as the game proceeds. We use the model to analyze the implications of the assumption that the players possess common (true) belief in rationality, thus extending the concept of rationalizability to extensive form games.

Suggested Citation

  • Oliver Board, 2003. "Algorithmic Characterization of Rationalizability in Extensive Form Games," Economics Series Working Papers 148, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:oxf:wpaper:148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:03600a74-ea51-445a-b41b-faa9bbb89a10
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Bonanno, Giacomo, 1999. "Recent results on belief, knowledge and the epistemic foundations of game theory," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 149-225, June.
    2. Kreps,David M. & Wallis,Kenneth F. (ed.), 1997. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521589819, October.
    3. Kreps,David M. & Wallis,Kenneth F. (ed.), 1997. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521589833, October.
    4. Kreps,David M. & Wallis,Kenneth F. (ed.), 1997. "Advances in Economics and Econometrics: Theory and Applications," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521589826, 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. Board, Oliver, 2004. "Dynamic interactive epistemology," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 49-80, October.
    2. Adam Brandenburger, 2007. "The power of paradox: some recent developments in interactive epistemology," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 35(4), pages 465-492, April.

    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. Ambrus, Attila, 2009. "Theories of Coalitional Rationality," Scholarly Articles 3204917, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    2. Zambrano, Eduardo, 2008. "Epistemic conditions for rationalizability," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 395-405, May.
    3. Licun Xue, "undated". "A Notion of Consistent Rationalizability - Between Weak and Pearce's Extensive Form Rationalizability," Economics Working Papers 2000-4, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    4. Xiao Luo, 2016. "Rational beliefs in rationalizability," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 81(2), pages 189-198, August.
    5. Board, Oliver, 2004. "Dynamic interactive epistemology," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 49-80, October.
    6. Oliver Board, 2002. "Algorithmic Characterization of Rationalizability in Extensive Form Games," Working Paper 244, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2002.
    7. Moscati Ivan, 2009. "Interactive and common knowledge in the state-space model," CESMEP Working Papers 200903, University of Turin.
    8. Larry Samuelson, 2004. "Modeling Knowledge in Economic Analysis," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 367-403, June.
    9. Ambrus, Attila, 2009. "Theories of coalitional rationality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 676-695, March.
    10. Symeonidis, George, 2001. "Price Competition, Innovation and Profitability: Theory and UK Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2816, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2007_032 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Alexander L. Brown & Zhikang Eric Chua & Colin F. Camerer, 2009. "Learning and Visceral Temptation in Dynamic Saving Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(1), pages 197-231.
    13. Patrick Francois & Joanne Roberts, 2003. "Contracting Productivity Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(1), pages 59-85.
    14. Joachim Inkmann, 2000. "Finite Sample Properties of One-Step, Two-Step and Bootstrap Empirical Likelihood Approaches to Efficient GMM Estimation," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0332, Econometric Society.
    15. Donatella, Baiardi & Claudio, Morana, 2015. "Financial deepening and income distribution inequality in the euro area," Working Papers 316, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 04 Dec 2015.
    16. Sandholm, William H. & Izquierdo, Segismundo S. & Izquierdo, Luis R., 2019. "Best experienced payoff dynamics and cooperation in the Centipede game," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 14(4), November.
    17. Martin Gaynor & James B. Rebitzer & Lowell J. Taylor, 2004. "Physician Incentives in Health Maintenance Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(4), pages 915-931, August.
    18. Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2006. "Monte Carlo tests with nuisance parameters: A general approach to finite-sample inference and nonstandard asymptotics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 443-477, August.
    19. Giovanna Devetag, 2000. "Transfer, Focality and Coordination: Some Experimental Results," LEM Papers Series 2000/02, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Dmitri Kolyuzhnov & Anna Bogomolova, 2004. "Escape Dynamics: A Continuous Time Approximation," Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings 27, Econometric Society.
    21. Yang, Qing Gong & Temple, Paul, 2012. "Reform and competitive selection in China: An analysis of firm exits," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 286-299.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    rationalizability; extensive form games; belief revision;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:oxf:wpaper:148. 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: Anne Pouliquen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfeixuk.html .

    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.