On ‘Informationally Robust Equilibria’ for Bimatrix Games

Informationally robust equilibria (IRE) are introduced in Robson (Games Econ Behav 7: 233–245, 1994) as a refinement of Nash equilibria for strategic games. Such equilibria are limits of a sequence of (subgame perfect) Nash equilibria in perturbed games where with small probability information about the strategic behavior is revealed to other players (information leakage). Focusing on bimatrix games, we consider a type of informationally robust equilibria and derive a number of properties they form a non-empty and closed subset of the Nash equilibria. Moreover, IRE is a strict concept in the sense that the IRE are independent of the exact sequence of probabilities with which information is leaked. The set of IRE, like the set of Nash equilibria, is the finite union of polytopes. In potential games, there is an IRE in pure strategies. In zero-sum games, the set of IRE has a product structure and its elements can be computed efficiently by using linear programming. We also discuss extensions to games with infinite strategy spaces and more than two players. The authors would like to thank Marieke Quant for her helpful comments.     

Infinite Histories and Steady Orbits in Repeated Games

We study a model of repeated games with the following features: (a) Infinite histories. The game has been played since days of yore, or is so perceived by the players: (b) Turing machines with memory. Since regular Turing machines coincide with bounded recall strategies (in the presence of infinite histories), we endow them with "external" memory; (c) Nonstrategic players. The players ignore complicated strategic considerations and speculations about them. Instead, each player uses his/her machine to update some statistics regarding the others′ behaviour, and chooses a best response to observed behaviour. Relying on these assumptions, we define a solution concept for the one shot game, called steady orbit. The (closure of the) set of steady orbit payoffs strictly includes the convex hull of the Nash equilibria payoffs and is strictly included in the correlated equilibria payoffs. Assumptions (a)–(c) above are independent to a large extent. In particular, one may define steady orbits without explicitly dealing with histories or machines.     

Characterizing belief-free review-strategy equilibrium payoffs under conditional independence

This paper proposes and studies a tractable subset of Nash equilibria, belief-free review-strategy equilibria, in repeated games with private monitoring. The payoff set of this class of equilibria is characterized in the limit as the discount factor converges to one for games where players observe statistically independent signals. As an application, we develop a simple sufficient condition for the existence of asymptotically efficient equilibria, and establish a folk theorem for N-player prisoner?s dilemma. All these results are robust to a perturbation of the signal distribution, and hence remain true even under almost-independent monitoring.     

Iterated strict dominance in general games

We offer a definition of iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies (IESDS^*) for games with (in)finite players, (non)compact strategy sets, and (dis)continuous payoff functions. IESDS^* is always a well-defined order independent procedure that can be used to solve Nash equilibrium in dominance-solvable games. We characterize IESDS^* by means of a “stability” criterion, and offer a sufficient and necessary epistemic condition for IESDS^*. We show by an example that IESDS^* may generate spurious Nash equilibria in the class of Reny's better-reply secure games. We provide sufficient/necessary conditions under which IESDS^* preserves the set of Nash equilibria.     

On the generic finiteness of equilibrium outcome distributions in bimatrix game forms

We provide an example of an outcome game form with two players for which there is an open set of utilities for both players such that, in each of the associated games, the set of Nash equilibria induces a continuum of outcome distributions.     

Learning to Learn, Pattern Recognition, and Nash Equilibrium

The paper studies a large class of bounded-rationality, probabilistic learning models on strategic-form games. The main assumption is that players “recognize” cyclic patterns in the observed history of play. The main result is convergence with probability one to a fixed pattern of pure strategy Nash equilibria, in a large class of “simple games” in which the pure equilibria are nicely spread along the lattice of the game. We also prove that a necessary condition for convergence of behavior to a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium is that the players consider arbitrarily long histories when forming their predictions.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Numbers: C72, D83.     

Asymptotic expected number of Nash equilibria of two-player normal form games

The formula given by McLennan [The mean number of real roots of a multihomogeneous system of polynomial equations, Amer. J. Math. 124 (2002) 49–73] is applied to the mean number of Nash equilibria of random two-player normal form games in which the two players have M and N pure strategies respectively. Holding M fixed while N→∞, the expected number of Nash equilibria is approximately . Letting M=N→∞, the expected number of Nash equilibria is , where is a constant, and almost all equilibria have each player assigning positive probability to approximately 31.5915 percent of her pure strategies.     

Bayesian learning and convergence to Nash equilibria without common priors

Summary. Consider an infinitely repeated game where each player is characterized by a “type” which may be unknown to the other players in the game. Suppose further that each player's belief about others is independent of that player's type. Impose an absolute continuity condition on the ex ante beliefs of players (weaker than mutual absolute continuity). Then any limit point of beliefs of players about the future of the game conditional on the past lies in the set of Nash or Subjective equilibria. Our assumption does not require common priors so is weaker than Jordan (1991); however our conclusion is weaker, we obtain convergence to subjective and not necessarily Nash equilibria. Our model is a generalization of the Kalai and Lehrer (1993) model. Our assumption is weaker than theirs. However, our conclusion is also weaker, and shows that limit points of beliefs, and not actual play, are subjective equilibria. Received: March 3, 1995; revised version: February 17, 1997     

Extensive-form games and strategic complementarities

I prove the subgame-perfect equivalent of the basic result for Nash equilibria in normal-form games of strategic complements: the set of subgame-perfect equilibria is a nonempty, complete lattice—in particular, subgame-perfect Nash equilibria exist. For this purpose I introduce a device that allows the study of the set of subgame-perfect equilibria as the set of fixed points of a correspondence. My results are limited because extensive-form games of strategic complementarities turn out—surprisingly—to be a very restrictive class of games.     

Equivalence of strong and coalition-proof Nash equilibria in games without spillovers

Summary This paper examines the conditions which guarantee that the set of coalition-proof Nash equilibria coincides with the set of strong Nash equilibria in the normal form games withoutspillovers. We find thatpopulation monotonicity properties of the payoff functions, when the payoff of a player changes monotonically when the size of the group of players choosing the same strategy increases, are crucial to obtain the equivalence of these two solution concepts. We identify the classes of games, satisfying population monotonicity properties, which yield the equivalence of the set of coalition-proof Nash equilibria and the set of strong Nash equilibria. We also provide sufficient conditions for the equivalence result even when the population monotonicity assumptions are relaxed.We wish to thank Mamoru Kaneko, Akihiko Matsui, Tomoichi Shinotsuka, Benyamin Shitoviz, Tayfun Sonmez, William Thomson, the participants of the Southeastern Economic Theory Meeting in Charlottesville and the seminars at CORE and University of Tsukuba for useful discussions and comments. Our special thanks due anonymous referee for the suggestion to add a section addressing the issue of existence of a strong Nash equilibrium.     

Congestion games with malicious players

We study the equilibria of non-atomic congestion games in which there are two types of players: rational players, who seek to minimize their own delay, and malicious players, who seek to maximize the average delay experienced by the rational players. We study the existence of pure and mixed Nash equilibria for these games, and we seek to quantify the impact of the malicious players on the equilibrium. One counterintuitive phenomenon which we demonstrate is the “windfall of malice”: paradoxically, when a myopically malicious player gains control of a fraction of the flow, the new equilibrium may be more favorable for the remaining rational players than the previous equilibrium.     

Walrasian analysis via two-player games

We associate to any pure exchange economy a game with only two players, regardless of the number of consumers. In this two-player game, each player represents a different role of the society, formed by all the individuals in the economy. Player 1 selects feasible allocations trying to make Pareto improvements. Player 2 chooses an alternative from the wider range of allocations that are feasible in the sense of Aubin. The set of Nash equilibria of our game is non-empty and our main result provides a characterization of Walrasian equilibria allocations as strong Nash equilibria of the associated society game.     

Secure implementation experiments: Do strategy-proof mechanisms really work?

Strategy-proofness, requiring that truth-telling is a dominant strategy, is a standard concept used in social choice theory. Saijo, Sjöström and Yamato [Saijo, T., Sjöström, T., Yamato, T., 2003. Secure implementation: Strategy-proof mechanisms reconsidered. Working paper 4-03-1. Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University] argue that this concept has serious drawbacks. In particular, many strategy-proof mechanisms have a continuum of Nash equilibria, including equilibria other than dominant strategy equilibria. For only a subset of strategy-proof mechanisms do the set of Nash equilibria and the set of dominant strategy equilibria coincide. For example, this double coincidence occurs in the Groves mechanism when preferences are single-peaked. We report experiments using two strategy-proof mechanisms. One of them has a large number of Nash equilibria, but the other has a unique Nash equilibrium. We found clear differences in the rate of dominant strategy play between the two.     

Partial exposure in large games

In this work we introduce the notion of partial exposure, in which the players of a simultaneous-move Bayesian game are exposed to the realized types and chosen actions of a subset of the other players. We show that in any large simultaneous-move game, each player has very little regret even after being partially exposed to other players. If players are given the opportunity to be exposed to others at the expense of a small decrease in utility, players will decline this opportunity, and the original Nash equilibria of the game will survive.     

Secure implementation experiments: Do strategy-proof mechanisms really work?

Strategy-proofness, requiring that truth-telling is a dominant strategy, is a standard concept used in social choice theory. Saijo, Sjöström and Yamato [Saijo, T., Sjöström, T., Yamato, T., 2003. Secure implementation: Strategy-proof mechanisms reconsidered. Working paper 4-03-1. Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University] argue that this concept has serious drawbacks. In particular, many strategy-proof mechanisms have a continuum of Nash equilibria, including equilibria other than dominant strategy equilibria. For only a subset of strategy-proof mechanisms do the set of Nash equilibria and the set of dominant strategy equilibria coincide. For example, this double coincidence occurs in the Groves mechanism when preferences are single-peaked. We report experiments using two strategy-proof mechanisms. One of them has a large number of Nash equilibria, but the other has a unique Nash equilibrium. We found clear differences in the rate of dominant strategy play between the two.     

Cooperative Outcomes through Noncooperative Games

This paper shows the equivalence between the stable solution set of any cooperative game in characteristic form (G1) and the subgame perfect Nash equilibria in pure strategies of a certain noncooperative game (G2). Players of G1 are named "agents." G2 is played by different players ("principals") who compete in wages to attract agents. The equivalence result holds when there are enough principals (if the game is superadditive, two principals suffice). Finally, another related cooperative game (G3) is constructed with both principals and agents as players. For G2 and G3 the same result is then proven, for any number of principals. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C71 and C72.     

Cycling in a stochastic learning algorithm for normal form games

In this paper we study a stochastic learning model for 2×2 normal form games that are played repeatedly. The main emphasis is put on the emergence of cycles. We assume that the players have neither information about the payoff matrix of their opponent nor about their own. At every round each player can only observe his or her action and the payoff he or she receives. We prove that the learning algorithm, which is modeled by an urn scheme proposed by Arthur (1993), leads with positive probability to a cycling of strategy profiles if the game has a mixed Nash equilibrium. In case there are strict Nash equilibria, the learning process converges a.s. to the set of Nash equilibria.     

EQUILIBRIA IN NON-COOPERATIVE GAMES II: DEVIATIONS BASED REFINEMENTS OF NASH EQUILIBRIUM

In any Nash equilibrium no player will unilaterally deviate. However, many games have multiple Nash equilibria. In this paper, we survey some refinements of Nash equilibria based on the hypothesis that any player may consider a deliberate deviation from a Nash equilibrium vector while expecting other players to respond optimally to this deviation. The concepts studied here differ in the expectations players have about other players' responses to a deviation. This sort of deviations philosophy is predicated on the thought process of players. Therefore, the validity of a particular equilibrium concept to an economic model may depend upon the relevance of the thought process implied by the concept.     

Iterated strict dominance in general games

We offer a definition of iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies (IESDS^*) for games with (in)finite players, (non)compact strategy sets, and (dis)continuous payoff functions. IESDS^* is always a well-defined order independent procedure that can be used to solve Nash equilibrium in dominance-solvable games. We characterize IESDS^* by means of a “stability” criterion, and offer a sufficient and necessary epistemic condition for IESDS^*. We show by an example that IESDS^* may generate spurious Nash equilibria in the class of Reny's better-reply secure games. We provide sufficient/necessary conditions under which IESDS^* preserves the set of Nash equilibria.     

Consistency of beliefs and epistemic conditions for Nash and correlated equilibria

A consistency condition (action-consistency) on the interim beliefs of players in a game is introduced. Action-consistency is weaker than common priors and, unlike common priors, is characterized by a “no-bets” condition on verifiable events. Using action-consistency, we provide epistemic conditions to Nash and correlated equilibria weakening the common knowledge restrictions in Aumann and Brandenburger [Aumann, R., Brandenburger, A., 1995. Epistemic conditions for Nash equilibrium. Econometrica 63, 1161–1180] and Aumann [Aumann, R., 1987. Correlated equilibrium as an expression of Bayesian rationality. Econometrica 55, 1–18].