Beliefs correspondences and equilibria in ambiguous games

De Marco, Giuseppe and Romaniello, Maria (2010): Beliefs correspondences and equilibria in ambiguous games.

Abstract

The Nash equilibrium concept combines two fundamental ideas. First, rational players choose the most preferred strategy given their beliefs about what other players will do. Second, it imposes the consistency condition that all players' beliefs are correct. This consistency condition has often been considered too strong and different solution concepts have been introduced in the literature in order to take into account ambiguous beliefs. In this paper, we show, by means of examples, that in some situation beliefs might be dependent on the strategy profile and that this kind of contingent ambiguity affects equilibrium behavior differently with respect to the existing models of ambiguous games. Hence we consider a multiple prior approach and subjective beliefs correspondences which depend on the strategy profile; we investigate existence of the equilibrium concepts corresponding to different attitudes towards ambiguity (namely optimism and pessimism). Finally we analyze particular beliefs correspondences: beliefs given by correlated equilibria and by ambiguity levels on events.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Noncooperative games, ambiguity, beliefs correspondence, equilibrium
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C72 - Noncooperative Games

References

[1] Aubin J.P. and H. Frankowska (1990): Set Valued Analysis, Birkhauser: Boston.

[2] Aumann R. J. (1974), Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies, Journal of Mathematical Economics, 1, 67-95.

[3] Aumann, R. J. (1987), Correlated equilibrium as an expression of Bayesian rationality, Econometrica, 55, 1-18.

[4] Border K.C. (1985): Fixed Point Theorems with Applications to Economics and Game Theory, Cambridge University Press.

[5] Choquet, G. (19534) Theory of capacities, Annales Institut Fourier, 5, 131-295.

[6] de Finetti B. (1931): Sul Significato Soggettivo della Probabilita, Fundamenta Mathematicae, T. XVIII, 298-329.

[7] De Marco G. and M. Romaniello (2010): On the Dynamics of Coalition Structures Beliefs, in Handbook of Optimization Theory: Decision Analysis and Applications (Acuna and Varela eds.), Nova Science Publishers: New York, to appear.

[8] De Marco G. and M. Romaniello (2010): A Dynamic Game of Coalition Formation under Umbiguity, Soft Computing, On-line First.

[9] Dow, J. and Werlang, S.R.C. (1994) Nash equilibrium under uncertainty: breaking down backward induction, Journal of Economic Theory, 64, 30524.

[10] Eichberger, J. and Kelsey, D. (2000) Non-Additive beliefs and strategic equilibria, Games and Economic Behavior, 30, 183215.

[11] Eichberger J., D. Kelsey, and B. C. Schipper (2008) Ambiguity and social interaction, Oxford Economic Papers.

[12] Ellsberg D. (1961): Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643669.,

[13] Gilboa, I. and Schmeidler, D. (1989) Maxmin expected utility with a non-unique prior, Journal of Mathematical Economics, 18, 141153.

[14] Harsanyi J.C. and R. Selten (1988): A General Theory of Equilibrium Selection in Games, MIT Press: Boston.

[15] Hart S. and M. Kurz (1983): Endogenous Coalition Formation, Econometrica, 51(4), 1047-1064.

[16] Lo, K.C. (1996) Equilibrium in beliefs under uncertainty, Journal of Economic Theory, 71, 44384.

[17] Marinacci M. (2000): Ambiguous Games, Games and Economic Behavior 31, 191-219.

[18] Moreno D. and J. Wooders (1996): Coalition-Proof Equilibrium, Games and Economic Behavior, 17, 80-112.

[19] Rosen J.B. (1965): Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibrium Points for Concave N-Person Games, Econometrica, 3, 520{534.

[20] Savage, L.J. (1954) Foundations of Statistics, Wiley: New York.

[21] Schmeidler, D. (1989) Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity, Econometrica, 57, 57187.