Common Knowledge

An opinionated introduction to philosophical issues connected to common knowledge

Common Knowledge in Email Exchanges

We consider a framework in which a group of agents communicates by means of emails, with the possibility of replies, forwards and blind carbon copies (BCC). We study the epistemic consequences of such email exchanges by introducing an appropriate epistemic language and semantics. This allows us to find out what agents learn from the emails they receive and to determine when a group of agents acquires common knowledge of the fact that an email was sent. We also show that in our framework from the epistemic point of view the BCC feature of emails cannot be simulated using messages without BCC recipients.Comment: 34 pages. To appear in ACM Transactions on Computational Logi

Admissibility and Common Knowledge

The implications of assuming that it is commonly known that players consider only admissible best responses are investigated.Within a states-of-the-world model where a state, for each player, determines a strategy set rather than a strategy the concept of fully permissible sets is defined.General existence is established, and a finite algorithm (eliminating strategy sets instead of strategies) is provided.The concept refines rationalizability as well as the Dekel-Fudenberg procedure, and captures a notion of forward induction.When players consider all best responses, the same framework can be used to define the concept of rationalizable sets, which characterizes rationalizability.game theory

Explicit Evidence Systems with Common Knowledge

Justification logics are epistemic logics that explicitly include justifications for the agents' knowledge. We develop a multi-agent justification logic with evidence terms for individual agents as well as for common knowledge. We define a Kripke-style semantics that is similar to Fitting's semantics for the Logic of Proofs LP. We show the soundness, completeness, and finite model property of our multi-agent justification logic with respect to this Kripke-style semantics. We demonstrate that our logic is a conservative extension of Yavorskaya's minimal bimodal explicit evidence logic, which is a two-agent version of LP. We discuss the relationship of our logic to the multi-agent modal logic S4 with common knowledge. Finally, we give a brief analysis of the coordinated attack problem in the newly developed language of our logic

Information Independence and Common Knowledge

Conditions of information independence are important in information economics and game theory. We present notions of partial independence in Bayesian environments, and study their relationships to notions of common knowledge.Bayesian games, independent types, common knowledgees

Information Independence and Common Knowledge

In Bayesian environments with private information, as described by the types of Harsanyi, how can types of agents be (statistically) disassociated from each other and how are such disassociations reflected in the agents’ knowledge structure? Conditions studied are (i) subjective independence (the opponents’ types are independent conditional on one’s own) and (ii) type disassociation under common knowledge (the agents’ types are independent, conditional on some common-knowledge variable). Subjective independence is motivated by its implications in Bayesian games and in studies of equilibrium concepts. We find that a variable that disassociates types is more informative than any common-knowledge variable. With three or more agents, conditions (i) and (ii) are equivalent. They also imply that any variable which is common knowledge to two agents is common knowledge to all, and imply the existence of a unique common-knowledge variable that disassociates types, which is the one defined by Aumann.Bayesian games, independent types, common knowledge.

Do conventions need to be common knowledge?

Do conventions need to be common knowledge? David Lewis builds this requirement into his definition of a convention. This paper explores the extent to which his approach finds support in the game theory literature. The knowledge formalism developed by Robert Aumann and others militates against Lewis’s approach, because it demonstrates that it is almost impossible for something to become common knowledge in a large society. On the other hand, Ariel Rubinstein’s Email Game suggests that coordinated action is equally hard for rational players. But an unnecessary simplifying assumption in the Email Game turns out to be doing all the work, and the paper concludes that common knowledge is better excluded from a definition of the conventions that we use to regulate our daily lives