Evidence for Learning to Learn Behavior in Normal Form Games

2004 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy C. Salmon
Author(s):  
Roxana Rădulescu ◽  
Timothy Verstraeten ◽  
Yijie Zhang ◽  
Patrick Mannion ◽  
Diederik M. Roijers ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Bruno Yun ◽  
Srdjan Vesic ◽  
Nir Oren

In this paper we describe an argumentation-based representation of normal form games, and demonstrate how argumentation can be used to compute pure strategy Nash equilibria. Our approach builds on Modgil’s Extended Argumentation Frameworks. We demonstrate its correctness, showprove several theoretical properties it satisfies, and outline how it can be used to explain why certain strategies are Nash equilibria to a non-expert human user.


2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (02) ◽  
pp. 1750-1757
Author(s):  
Erman Acar ◽  
Reshef Meir

We propose a simple uncertainty modification for the agent model in normal-form games; at any given strategy profile, the agent can access only a set of “possible profiles” that are within a certain distance from the actual action profile. We investigate the various instantiations in which the agent chooses her strategy using well-known rationales e.g., considering the worst case, or trying to minimize the regret, to cope with such uncertainty. Any such modification in the behavioral model naturally induces a corresponding notion of equilibrium; a distance-based equilibrium. We characterize the relationships between the various equilibria, and also their connections to well-known existing solution concepts such as Trembling-hand perfection. Furthermore, we deliver existence results, and show that for some class of games, such solution concepts can actually lead to better outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document