Difference between revisions of "Non-cooperative game"
(Importing text file) |
Ulf Rehmann (talk | contribs) m (tex encoded by computer) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | <!-- | ||
| + | n0669801.png | ||
| + | $#A+1 = 32 n = 1 | ||
| + | $#C+1 = 32 : ~/encyclopedia/old_files/data/N066/N.0606980 Non\AAhcooperative game | ||
| + | Automatically converted into TeX, above some diagnostics. | ||
| + | Please remove this comment and the {{TEX|auto}} line below, | ||
| + | if TeX found to be correct. | ||
| + | --> | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{TEX|auto}} | ||
| + | {{TEX|done}} | ||
| + | |||
A system | A system | ||
| − | + | $$ | |
| + | \Gamma = < J, \{ S _ {i} \} _ {i \in J } ,\ | ||
| + | \{ H _ {i} \} _ {i \in J } > , | ||
| + | $$ | ||
| − | where | + | where $ J $ |
| + | is the set of players, $ S _ {i} $ | ||
| + | is the set of strategies (cf. [[Strategy (in game theory)|Strategy (in game theory)]]) of the $ i $- | ||
| + | th player and $ H _ {i} $ | ||
| + | is the gain function of the $ i $- | ||
| + | th player, defined on the Cartesian product $ S = \prod _ {i \in J } S _ {i} $. | ||
| + | A non-cooperative game is played as follows: players, who are acting individually (do not form a coalition, do not cooperate), select their strategies $ s _ {i} \in S _ {i} $, | ||
| + | as a result of which the situation $ s = \prod _ {i \in J } s _ {i} $ | ||
| + | appears, in which the $ i $- | ||
| + | th player obtains the gain $ H _ {i} ( s) $. | ||
| + | The main optimality principle in a non-cooperative game is the principle of realizability of the objective [[#References|[1]]], which generates the Nash equilibrium solutions. A solution $ s ^ {*} $ | ||
| + | is called an equilibrium solution if for all $ i \in J $, | ||
| + | $ s _ {i} \in S _ {i} $, | ||
| + | the inequality | ||
| − | + | $$ | |
| + | H _ {i} ( s ^ {*} ) \geq H _ {i} ( s ^ {*} \| s _ {i} ) , | ||
| + | $$ | ||
| − | where | + | where $ s ^ {*} \| s _ {i} = \prod _ {j \in J \setminus i } s _ {j} ^ {*} \times s _ {i} $, |
| + | is valid. Thus, none of the players is interested in unilaterally disturbing the equilibrium solution previously agreed upon between them. It has been proved (Nash's theorem) that a finite non-cooperative game (the sets $ J $ | ||
| + | and $ S _ {i} $ | ||
| + | are finite) possesses an equilibrium solution for mixed strategies. This theorem has been generalized to include infinite non-cooperative games with a finite number of players [[#References|[3]]] and non-cooperative games with an infinite number of players (cf. [[Non-atomic game|Non-atomic game]]). | ||
| − | Two equilibrium solutions | + | Two equilibrium solutions $ s $ |
| + | and $ t $ | ||
| + | are called interchangeable if any solution $ r = \prod _ {i \in J } r _ {i} $, | ||
| + | where $ r _ {i} = s _ {i} $ | ||
| + | or $ r _ {i} = t _ {i} $, | ||
| + | $ i \in J $, | ||
| + | is also an equilibrium solution. They are called equivalent if $ H _ {i} ( s) = H _ {i} ( t) $ | ||
| + | for all $ i \in J $. | ||
| + | Let $ Q $ | ||
| + | be the set of all equilibrium solutions, and let $ Q ^ \prime \subset Q $ | ||
| + | be the set of equilibrium solutions which are Pareto optimal (cf. [[Arbitration scheme|Arbitration scheme]]). A game is called Nash solvable and $ Q $ | ||
| + | is said to be a Nash solution if all $ s \in Q $ | ||
| + | are equivalent and interchangeable. A game is called strictly solvable if $ Q ^ \prime $ | ||
| + | is non-empty and all $ s \in Q ^ \prime $ | ||
| + | are equivalent and interchangeable. Two-person zero-sum games (cf. [[Two-person zero-sum game|Two-person zero-sum game]]) with optimal strategies are Nash solvable and strictly solvable; however, in the general case such a solvability is often impossible. | ||
Other attempts at completing the principle of realizability of the objective were made. Thus, it was suggested [[#References|[4]]] that the unique equilibrium solution or the maximum solution (in this last situation each player may ensure his/her own gain irrespective of the strategies chosen by the other players), the choice of which is based on the introduction of a new preference relation on the set of solutions, be considered as the solution of the non-cooperative game. In another approach the solution of a non-cooperative game is defined by a subjective prognosis of the behaviour of the players [[#References|[5]]]. | Other attempts at completing the principle of realizability of the objective were made. Thus, it was suggested [[#References|[4]]] that the unique equilibrium solution or the maximum solution (in this last situation each player may ensure his/her own gain irrespective of the strategies chosen by the other players), the choice of which is based on the introduction of a new preference relation on the set of solutions, be considered as the solution of the non-cooperative game. In another approach the solution of a non-cooperative game is defined by a subjective prognosis of the behaviour of the players [[#References|[5]]]. | ||
| Line 15: | Line 62: | ||
====References==== | ====References==== | ||
<table><TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> N.N. Vorob'ev, "The present state of the theory of games" ''Russian Math. Surveys'' , '''25''' : 2 (1970) pp. 77–136 ''Uspekhi Mat. Nauk'' , '''25''' : 2 (1970) pp. 81–140</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. Nash, "Noncooperative games" ''Ann. of Math.'' , '''54''' (1951) pp. 286–295</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> I.L. Glicksberg, "A further generalization of the Kakutani fixed point theorem, with application to Nash equilibrium points" ''Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''3''' (1952) pp. 170–174</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[4]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J.C. Harsanyi, "A general solution for finite noncooperative games based on risk-dominance" L.S. Shapley (ed.) A.W. Tucker (ed.) M. Dresher (ed.) , ''Advances in game theory'' , Princeton Univ. Press (1964) pp. 651–679</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[5]</TD> <TD valign="top"> E.I. Vilkas, "The axiomatic definition of equilibrium points and the value of a non-coalition <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/n/n066/n066980/n06698033.png" />-person game" ''Theory Probab. Appl.'' , '''13''' : 3 (1968) pp. 523–527 ''Teor. Veroyatnost. i Primenen.'' , '''13''' : 3 (1968) pp. 555–560</TD></TR></table> | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> N.N. Vorob'ev, "The present state of the theory of games" ''Russian Math. Surveys'' , '''25''' : 2 (1970) pp. 77–136 ''Uspekhi Mat. Nauk'' , '''25''' : 2 (1970) pp. 81–140</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J. Nash, "Noncooperative games" ''Ann. of Math.'' , '''54''' (1951) pp. 286–295</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[3]</TD> <TD valign="top"> I.L. Glicksberg, "A further generalization of the Kakutani fixed point theorem, with application to Nash equilibrium points" ''Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''3''' (1952) pp. 170–174</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[4]</TD> <TD valign="top"> J.C. Harsanyi, "A general solution for finite noncooperative games based on risk-dominance" L.S. Shapley (ed.) A.W. Tucker (ed.) M. Dresher (ed.) , ''Advances in game theory'' , Princeton Univ. Press (1964) pp. 651–679</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[5]</TD> <TD valign="top"> E.I. Vilkas, "The axiomatic definition of equilibrium points and the value of a non-coalition <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/n/n066/n066980/n06698033.png" />-person game" ''Theory Probab. Appl.'' , '''13''' : 3 (1968) pp. 523–527 ''Teor. Veroyatnost. i Primenen.'' , '''13''' : 3 (1968) pp. 555–560</TD></TR></table> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
====Comments==== | ====Comments==== | ||
| − | |||
====References==== | ====References==== | ||
<table><TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> N.N. Vorob'ev, "Game theory. Lectures for economists and system scientists" , Springer (1977) (Translated from Russian)</TD></TR></table> | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> N.N. Vorob'ev, "Game theory. Lectures for economists and system scientists" , Springer (1977) (Translated from Russian)</TD></TR></table> | ||
Latest revision as of 08:03, 6 June 2020
A system
$$ \Gamma = < J, \{ S _ {i} \} _ {i \in J } ,\ \{ H _ {i} \} _ {i \in J } > , $$
where $ J $ is the set of players, $ S _ {i} $ is the set of strategies (cf. Strategy (in game theory)) of the $ i $- th player and $ H _ {i} $ is the gain function of the $ i $- th player, defined on the Cartesian product $ S = \prod _ {i \in J } S _ {i} $. A non-cooperative game is played as follows: players, who are acting individually (do not form a coalition, do not cooperate), select their strategies $ s _ {i} \in S _ {i} $, as a result of which the situation $ s = \prod _ {i \in J } s _ {i} $ appears, in which the $ i $- th player obtains the gain $ H _ {i} ( s) $. The main optimality principle in a non-cooperative game is the principle of realizability of the objective [1], which generates the Nash equilibrium solutions. A solution $ s ^ {*} $ is called an equilibrium solution if for all $ i \in J $, $ s _ {i} \in S _ {i} $, the inequality
$$ H _ {i} ( s ^ {*} ) \geq H _ {i} ( s ^ {*} \| s _ {i} ) , $$
where $ s ^ {*} \| s _ {i} = \prod _ {j \in J \setminus i } s _ {j} ^ {*} \times s _ {i} $, is valid. Thus, none of the players is interested in unilaterally disturbing the equilibrium solution previously agreed upon between them. It has been proved (Nash's theorem) that a finite non-cooperative game (the sets $ J $ and $ S _ {i} $ are finite) possesses an equilibrium solution for mixed strategies. This theorem has been generalized to include infinite non-cooperative games with a finite number of players [3] and non-cooperative games with an infinite number of players (cf. Non-atomic game).
Two equilibrium solutions $ s $ and $ t $ are called interchangeable if any solution $ r = \prod _ {i \in J } r _ {i} $, where $ r _ {i} = s _ {i} $ or $ r _ {i} = t _ {i} $, $ i \in J $, is also an equilibrium solution. They are called equivalent if $ H _ {i} ( s) = H _ {i} ( t) $ for all $ i \in J $. Let $ Q $ be the set of all equilibrium solutions, and let $ Q ^ \prime \subset Q $ be the set of equilibrium solutions which are Pareto optimal (cf. Arbitration scheme). A game is called Nash solvable and $ Q $ is said to be a Nash solution if all $ s \in Q $ are equivalent and interchangeable. A game is called strictly solvable if $ Q ^ \prime $ is non-empty and all $ s \in Q ^ \prime $ are equivalent and interchangeable. Two-person zero-sum games (cf. Two-person zero-sum game) with optimal strategies are Nash solvable and strictly solvable; however, in the general case such a solvability is often impossible.
Other attempts at completing the principle of realizability of the objective were made. Thus, it was suggested [4] that the unique equilibrium solution or the maximum solution (in this last situation each player may ensure his/her own gain irrespective of the strategies chosen by the other players), the choice of which is based on the introduction of a new preference relation on the set of solutions, be considered as the solution of the non-cooperative game. In another approach the solution of a non-cooperative game is defined by a subjective prognosis of the behaviour of the players [5].
References
| [1] | N.N. Vorob'ev, "The present state of the theory of games" Russian Math. Surveys , 25 : 2 (1970) pp. 77–136 Uspekhi Mat. Nauk , 25 : 2 (1970) pp. 81–140 |
| [2] | J. Nash, "Noncooperative games" Ann. of Math. , 54 (1951) pp. 286–295 |
| [3] | I.L. Glicksberg, "A further generalization of the Kakutani fixed point theorem, with application to Nash equilibrium points" Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 3 (1952) pp. 170–174 |
| [4] | J.C. Harsanyi, "A general solution for finite noncooperative games based on risk-dominance" L.S. Shapley (ed.) A.W. Tucker (ed.) M. Dresher (ed.) , Advances in game theory , Princeton Univ. Press (1964) pp. 651–679 |
| [5] | E.I. Vilkas, "The axiomatic definition of equilibrium points and the value of a non-coalition -person game" Theory Probab. Appl. , 13 : 3 (1968) pp. 523–527 Teor. Veroyatnost. i Primenen. , 13 : 3 (1968) pp. 555–560 |
Comments
References
| [a1] | N.N. Vorob'ev, "Game theory. Lectures for economists and system scientists" , Springer (1977) (Translated from Russian) |
Non-cooperative game. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Non-cooperative_game&oldid=17485
-person game" Theory Probab. Appl. , 13 : 3 (1968) pp. 523–527 Teor. Veroyatnost. i Primenen. , 13 : 3 (1968) pp. 555–560