ScholarLens Back to search
2017•RePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsRequires access

Algorithms for cautious reasoning in games

Geir B. Asheim, Andrés Perea

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

We provide comparable algorithms for the Dekel-Fudenberg procedure, iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability by means of the concepts of preference restrictions and likelihood orderings. We apply the algorithms for comparing iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability, and provide a sufficient condition under which iterated admissibility does not rule out properly rationalizable strategies. Finally, we use the algorithms to examine an economically relevant strategic situation, namely a bilateral commitment bargaining game.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We provide comparable algorithms for the Dekel-Fudenberg procedure, iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability by means of the concepts of preference restrictions and likelihood orderings. We apply the algorithms for comparing iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability, and provide a sufficient condition under which iterated admissibility does not rule out properly rationalizable strategies. Finally, we use the algorithms to examine an economically relevant strategic situation, namely a bilateral commitment bargaining game.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We provide comparable algorithms for the Dekel-Fudenberg procedure, iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability by means of the concepts of preference restrictions and likelihood orderings. We apply the algorithms for comparing iterated admissibility and proper rationalizability, and provide a sufficient condition under which iterated admissibility does not rule out properly rationalizable strategies. Finally, we use the algorithms to examine an economically relevant strategic situation, namely a bilateral commitment bargaining game.

Key concepts: Rationalizability, Iterated function, Mathematical economics, Preference, Computer science, Mathematics, Mathematical optimization, Nash equilibrium

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Algorithms for cautious reasoning in games — Research Paper | ScholarLens