David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:329 - 343 (1988)
A large class of games is that of non-cooperative, extensive form games of perfect information. When the length of these games is finite, the method used to reach a solution is that of a backward induction. Working from the terminal nodes, dominated strategies are successively deleted and what remains is a unique equilibrium. Game theorists have generally assumed that the informational requirement needed to solve these games is that the players have common knowledge of rationality. This assumption, however, has given rise to several problems and paradoxes. Most notably, it has been shown that the common knowledge assumption makes the theory of the game inconsistent at some information set. The present paper shows that a) no common knowledge of rationality need be assumed for the backward induction solution to hold. Rather, it is sufficient that the players have a number of levels of knowledge proportional to the length of the game, and b) it is also necessary that the number of levels of knowledge is finite and proportional to the length of the game. For a higher number of levels of knowledge, inconsistencies arise.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Cristina Bicchieri (1990). Paradoxes of Rationality. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 15 (1):65-79.
Bertrand R. Munier & Jean-Louis Rulli�re (1993). Are Game Theoretic Concepts Suitable Negotiation Support Tools? From Nash Equilibrium Refinements Toward a Cognitive Concept of Rationality. Theory and Decision 34 (3):235-253.
Similar books and articles
Martin Dufwenberg & Johan Lindén (1996). Inconsistencies in Extensive Games. Erkenntnis 45 (1):103 - 114.
Cristina Bicchieri & Gian Aldo Antonelli (1995). Game-Theoretic Axioms for Local Rationality and Bounded Knowledge. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4 (2):145-167.
Ken Binmore (2011). Interpreting Knowledge in the Backward Induction Problem. Episteme 8 (3):248-261.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2008). Common Knowledge of Rationality in Extensive Games. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 49 (3):261-280.
Philip J. Reny (1988). Common Knowledge and Games with Perfect Information. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:363 - 369.
Thorsten Clausing (2004). Belief Revision in Games of Perfect Information. Economics and Philosophy 20 (1):89-115.
Wlodek Rabinowicz (1998). Grappling With the Centipede: Defence of Backward Induction for BI-Terminating Games. Economics and Philosophy 14 (01):95-.
Thorsten Clausing (2003). Doxastic Conditions for Backward Induction. Theory and Decision 54 (4):315-336.
Cristina Bicchieri & Oliver Schulte (1996). Common Reasoning About Admissibility. Erkenntnis 45 (2-3):299 - 325.
John Broome & Wlodek Rabinowicz (1999). Backwards Induction in the Centipede Game. Analysis 59 (264):237–242.
Oliver Schulte (1996). Common Reasoning About Admissibility. Erkenntnis 45 (2/3):299 - 325.
Magnus Jiborn & Wlodek Rabinowicz (2003). Reconsidering the Foole's Rejoinder: Backward Induction in Indefinitely Iterated Prisoner's Dilemmas. Synthese 136 (2):135 - 157.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads7 ( #189,127 of 1,103,233 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #85,078 of 1,103,233 )
How can I increase my downloads?