Equilibria in Social Belief Removal1
نویسندگان
چکیده
In studies of multi-agent interaction, especially in game theory, the notion of equilibrium often plays a prominent role. A typical scenario for the belief merging problem is one in which several agents pool their beliefs together to form a consistent “group” picture of the world. The aim of this paper is to define and study new notions of equilibria in belief merging. To do so, we assume the agents arrive at consistency via the use of a social belief removal function, in which each agent, using his own individual removal function, removes some belief from his stock of beliefs. We examine several notions of equilibria in this setting, assuming a general framework for individual belief removal due to Booth et al. We look at their inter-relations as well as prove their existence or otherwise. We also show how our equilibria can be seen as a generalisation of the idea of taking maximal consistent subsets of agents.
منابع مشابه
Equilibria in Social Belief Removal
In studies of multi-agent interaction, especially in game theory, the notion of equilibrium often plays a prominent role. A typical scenario for the belief merging problem is one in which several agents pool their beliefs together to form a consistent “group” picture of the world. The aim of this paper is to define and study new notions of equilibria in belief merging. To do so, we assume the a...
متن کاملBelief-invariant Equilibria in Games with Incomplete Information
Drawing on ideas from game theory and quantum physics, we investigate nonlocal correlations from the point of view of equilibria in games of incomplete information. These equilibria can be classified in decreasing power as general communication equilibria, beliefinvariant equilibria and correlated equilibria, all of which contain the familiar Nash equilibria. The notion of belief-invariant equi...
متن کاملBelief-free equilibria in games with incomplete information∗
We define belief-free equilibria in two-player games with incomplete information as sequential equilibria for which players’ continuation strategies are best-replies, after every history, independently of their beliefs about the state of nature. We characterize a set of payoffs that includes all belief-free equilibrium payoffs. Conversely, any payoff in the interior of this set is a belief-free...
متن کاملDEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS WORKING PAPER SERIES A Belief-based Approach to Network Formation
In this paper we consider four different game-theoretic approaches to describe the formation of social networks under mutual consent and costly communication. First, we consider Jackson-Wolinsky’s concept of pairwise stability. Next, we introduce a stronger version of this concept based on linking decisions by nodes, denoted as strict pairwise stability. Third, we consider Myerson’s consent gam...
متن کاملDiscrete preference games: social influence through coordination, and beyond
We study discrete preference games that have been used to model issues such as the formation of opinions or the adoption of innovations in the context of a social network. In these games, the payoff of each agent depends on the agreement of her strategy to her internal belief and on its coordination with the strategies of her neighbors in the social network. Recent papers have obtained bounds o...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009