2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00191-017-0539-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolution and correlated equilibrium

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
11
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
2
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our work belongs to a body of game theory that has studied how correlated equilibria can emerge in a decentralized way through evolutionary or learning dynamics (23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32). The first strand in this body starts with the seminal paper of Selten (23) who proved that evolutionarily stable strategies conditional on cues in the world have to be pure strategies.…”
Section: Significancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our work belongs to a body of game theory that has studied how correlated equilibria can emerge in a decentralized way through evolutionary or learning dynamics (23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32). The first strand in this body starts with the seminal paper of Selten (23) who proved that evolutionarily stable strategies conditional on cues in the world have to be pure strategies.…”
Section: Significancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…When a probability distribution over recommended action profiles creates a correlation between the recommendations to different players, it can sometimes be strictly better to obey what the device signaled to a player than to choose any alternative. Strictness lies at the heart of the concept of evolutionary stability, and along these lines, it has been shown that a strict correlated equilibrium strategy is evolutionarily stable [1,2]. I apply this fact to rock-paper-scissors and show that there is an evolutionarily stable strategy, consisting of a strict correlated equilibrium when the game has three players who earn a payoff from three-way ties that exceeds the average of a winning-payoff and a losing-payoff.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…By contrast, both the stable and (nongeneric) unstable outcomes of introspective equilibrium deliver intuitive comparative statics (Proposition 1(d)). 42 Other adaptive models that predict miscoordination are silent on which outcome is selected (e.g., Foster and Vohra, 1997;Fudenberg and Levine, 1999;Hart and Mas-Colell, 2000;Hart, 2005;Metzger, 2018). These models therefore cannot address the key question of how strategic behavior and the value change when payoffs are varied.…”
Section: Relation To Adaptive Dynamicsmentioning
confidence: 99%