Using HMM in Strategic Games

In this paper we describe an approach to resolve strategic games in which players can assume different types along the game. Our goal is to infer which type the opponent is adopting at each moment so that we can increase the player's odds. To achieve that we use Markov games combined with hidden Markov model. We discuss a hypothetical example of a tennis game whose solution can be applied to any game with similar characteristics.Comment: In Proceedings DCM 2013, arXiv:1403.768

Boundedly rational versus optimization-based models of strategic thinking and learning in games

The paper is a comment on the article by R. Harstad and R. Selten and considers the tradeoff between bounded rationality and optimization models in the game-theoretic context. The author shows that in most of the models elements of opimization are still retained and that it is thus more productive to further improve the optimization-based modeling rather than to abandon them altogether in favour of bounded rationality

You better play 7: mutual versus common knowledge of advice in a weak-link experiment

This paper presents the results of an experiment on mutual versus common knowledge of advice in a two-player weak-link game with random matching. Our experimental subjects play in pairs for thirteen rounds. After a brief learning phase common to all treatments, we vary the knowledge levels associated with external advice given in the form of a suggestion to pick the strategy supporting the payoff- dominant equilibrium. Our results are somewhat surprising and can be summarized as follows: in all our treatments both the choice of the efficiency-inducing action and the percentage of efficient equilibrium play are higher with respect to the control treatment, revealing that even a condition as weak as mutual knowledge of level 1 is sufficient to significantly increase the salience of the efficient equilibrium with respect to the absence of advice. Furthermore, and contrary to our hypothesis, mutual knowledge of level 2 induces, under suitable conditions, successful coordination more frequently than common knowledge

Game on! a report on the interactive leisure software subsector in London

There is a paucity of good quality data on the UK video games industry. Information such as value-added, investment on R&D, average annual expenditure on training and the value of video games in terms of exports, for example, is thin or incomplete. This is a serious problem. If we are to improve the competitiveness of the UK games development sector then we must have better quality information. Games developers will then be able to benchmark their business activities against industry averages. Overseas investors will also then be better informed about the benefits of investing in the UK leisure software sector. This Report confirms the lacunae in our knowledge that exists about the video games industry. For example, the Office of National Statistics still does not have a specific code to identify interactive leisure software businesses. Yet the Report also shines a light on the video games industry in the UK in general and in London in particular

Experimental Economics: Contributions, Recent Developments, and New Challenges

Although economics has long been considered as a non-experimental science, the development of experimental economics and behavioral economics is amazingly rapid and affects most fields of research. This paper first attempts at defining the main contributions of experiments to economics. It also identifies four main trends in the development of experimental research in economics. The third contribution of this paper is to identify the major theoretical and methodological challenges faced by behavioral and experimental economics.behavioral economy ; Experimental economics ; field experiment ; quantitative methods

You Better Play 7: Mutual versus Common Knowledge of Advice in a Weak-link Experiment

This paper presents the results of an experiment on mutual versus common knowl- edge of advice in a two-player weak-link game with random matching. Our experimen- tal subjects play in pairs for thirteen rounds. After a brief learning phase common to all treatments, we vary the knowledge levels associated with external advice given in the form of a suggestion to pick the strategy supporting the payoff-dominant equilib- rium. In the mutual knowledge of level 1 treatment, the suggestion appears on every subject's monitor at the beginning of every round, with no common knowledge that everybody sees the same suggestion. In the mutual knowledge of level 2 treatment, the same suggestion appears on each subject's monitor, accompanied by the request to "send" the suggestion to the partner in the round, followed by a notification that the message has been read. Finally, in the common knowledge treatment, the suggestion is read aloud by the experimenter at the end of the learning phase. Our results are somewhat surprising and can be summarized as follows: in all our treatments both the choice of the efficiency-inducing action and the percentage of efficient equilibrium play are higher with respect to the control treatment, revealing that even a condition as weak as mutual knowledge of level 1 is sufficient to significantly increase the salience of the efficient equilibrium with respect to the absence of advice. Furthermore, and contrary to our hypothesis, mutual knowledge of level 2 (as the one occurring in our "message" treatment) induces successful coordination more frequently than common knowledge.Coordination games; experimental philosophy; epistemic attitudes, weak-link game; conventions

Experimental Economics: Contributions, Recent Developments, and New Challenges

Although economics has long been considered as a non-experimental science, the development of experimental economics and behavioral economics is amazingly rapid and affects most fields of research. This paper first attempts at defining the main contributions of experiments to economics. It also identifies four main trends in the development of experimental research in economics. The third contribution of this paper is to identify the major theoretical and methodological challenges faced by behavioral and experimental economics.experimental economics; neuroeconomics; quantitative methods; field experiments