IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/the/publsh/2068.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Savage games

Author

Listed:
  • Grant, Simon

    (Research School of Economics, Australian National University and Department of Economics, The University of Queensland)

  • Meneghel, Idione

    (Research School of Economics, Australian National University)

  • Tourky, Rabee

    (Research School of Economics, Australian National University)

Abstract

We define and discuss Savage games, which are ordinal games of incomplete information set in L. J. Savage's framework of purely subjective uncertainty. Every Bayesian game is ordinally equivalent to a Savage game. However, Savage games are free of priors, probabilities and payoffs. Players' information and subjective attitudes toward uncertainty are encoded in the state-dependent preferences over state contingent action profiles. In the class of games we consider, player preferences satisfy versions of Savage's sure thing principle and small event continuity postulate. Savage games provide a tractable framework for studying attitudes towards uncertainty in a strategic setting. The work eschews any notion of objective randomization, convexity, monotonicity, or independence of beliefs. We provide a number of examples illustrating the usefulness of the framework, including novel results for a purely ordinal matching game that satisfies all of our assumptions and for games for which the preferences of the players admit representations from a wide class of decision-theoretic models.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant, Simon & Meneghel, Idione & Tourky, Rabee, 2016. "Savage games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    • Handle: RePEc:the:publsh:2068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econtheory.org/ojs/index.php/te/article/viewFile/20160641/15468/461
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gul, Faruk & Lantto, Outi, 1990. "Betweenness satisfying preferences and dynamic choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 162-177, October.
    2. Bade, Sophie, 2011. "Ambiguous act equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 246-260, March.
    3. Grant, Simon & Kajii, Atsushi & Polak, Ben, 2000. "Decomposable Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 92(2), pages 169-197, June.
    4. Eichberger, Jurgen & Kelsey, David, 1996. "Uncertainty Aversion and Preference for Randomisation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 31-43, October.
    5. Jianwei Wang & Yongchao Zhang, 2012. "Purification, saturation and the exact law of large numbers," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(3), pages 527-545, August.
    6. Adam Brandenburger & Eddie Dekel, 2014. "Hierarchies of Beliefs and Common Knowledge," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 2, pages 31-41, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Philip J. Reny, 2011. "On the Existence of Monotone Pure‐Strategy Equilibria in Bayesian Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(2), pages 499-553, March.
    8. Tan, Tommy Chin-Chiu & da Costa Werlang, Sergio Ribeiro, 1988. "The Bayesian foundations of solution concepts of games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 370-391, August.
    9. Bergemann, Dirk & Morris, Stephen & Takahashi, Satoru, 2017. "Interdependent preferences and strategic distinguishability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 329-371.
    10. Khan, M. Ali & Yeneng, Sun, 1995. "Pure strategies in games with private information," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 633-653.
    11. R. J. Aumann & J. H. Dreze, 2009. "Assessing Strategic Risk," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-16, February.
    12. Robert J. Aumann & Jacques H. Dreze, 2008. "Rational Expectations in Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 72-86, March.
    13. Frank Riedel & Linda Sass, 2014. "Ellsberg games," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 469-509, April.
    14. Epstein, Larry G & Wang, Tan, 1996. ""Beliefs about Beliefs" without Probabilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(6), pages 1343-1373, November.
    15. Aumann, Robert J., 1974. "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
    16. MERTENS, Jean-François & ZAMIR, Shmuel, 1985. "Formulation of Bayesian analysis for games with incomplete information," LIDAM Reprints CORE 608, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    17. ,, 2008. "Subjective expected utility in games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(3), September.
    18. Itzhak Gilboa & D. Schmeidler, 2003. "Expected Utility in the Context of a Game," Post-Print hal-00752136, HAL.
    19. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    20. M. Khan & Kali Rath & Yeneng Sun, 2006. "The Dvoretzky-Wald-Wolfowitz theorem and purification in atomless finite-action games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 34(1), pages 91-104, April.
    21. Khan, M. Ali & Rath, Kali P., 2009. "On games with incomplete information and the Dvoretsky-Wald-Wolfowitz theorem with countable partitions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(12), pages 830-837, December.
    22. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 2003. "A derivation of expected utility maximization in the context of a game," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 172-182, July.
    23. Azrieli, Yaron & Teper, Roee, 2011. "Uncertainty aversion and equilibrium existence in games with incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 310-317.
    24. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    25. Atsushi Kajii & Takashi Ui, 2005. "Incomplete Information Games With Multiple Priors," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 332-351, September.
    26. Fu, Haifeng & Sun, Yeneng & Yannelis, Nicholas C. & Zhang, Zhixiang, 2007. "Pure strategy equilibria in games with private and public information," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 523-531, June.
    27. Epstein, Larry G. & Marinacci, Massimo, 2007. "Mutual absolute continuity of multiple priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 716-720, November.
    28. Konrad Podczeck, 2009. "On purification of measure-valued maps," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(2), pages 399-418, February.
    29. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1973. "Equilibrium points of nonatomic games," LIDAM Reprints CORE 146, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    30. Gilboa, Itzhak, 1987. "Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-88, February.
    31. Paul R. Milgrom & Robert J. Weber, 1985. "Distributional Strategies for Games with Incomplete Information," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 619-632, November.
    32. Kreps, David M, 1979. "A Representation Theorem for "Preference for Flexibility"," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 565-577, May.
    33. Yu, Haomiao & Zhang, Zhixiang, 2007. "Pure strategy equilibria in games with countable actions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 192-200, February.
    34. Fu, Haifeng & Xu, Ying & Zhang, Luyi, 2007. "Characterizing Pure-strategy Equilibria in Large Games," MPRA Paper 7514, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    35. Borgers, Tilman, 1993. "Pure Strategy Dominance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(2), pages 423-430, March.
    36. Haifeng Fu, 2008. "Mixed-strategy equilibria and strong purification for games with private and public information," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 37(3), pages 521-532, December.
    37. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    38. John C. Harsanyi, 1967. "Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III Part I. The Basic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 159-182, November.
    39. Roy Radner & Robert W. Rosenthal, 1982. "Private Information and Pure-Strategy Equilibria," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 401-409, August.
    40. Muraviev, Igor & Riedel, Frank & Sass, Linda, 2017. "Kuhn’s Theorem for extensive form Ellsberg games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 26-41.
    41. Erik J. Balder, 1988. "Generalized Equilibrium Results for Games with Incomplete Information," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 265-276, May.
    42. Karni, Edi & Schmeidler, David & Vind, Karl, 1983. "On State Dependent Preferences and Subjective Probabilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 1021-1031, July.
    43. Epstein, Larry G., 1997. "Preference, Rationalizability and Equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 1-29, March.
    44. Peter P. Wakker & Horst Zank, 1999. "State Dependent Expected Utility for Savage's State Space," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 8-34, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bergemann, Dirk & Morris, Stephen & Takahashi, Satoru, 2017. "Interdependent preferences and strategic distinguishability," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 329-371.
    2. Frank Riedel, 2017. "Uncertain Acts in Games," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 275-292, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grant, Simon & Meneghel, Idione & Tourky, Rabee, 2013. "Savage Games: A Theory of Strategic Interaction with Purely Subjective Uncertainty," Risk and Sustainable Management Group Working Papers 151501, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    2. Beißner, Patrick & Khan, M. Ali, 2019. "On Hurwicz–Nash equilibria of non-Bayesian games under incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 470-490.
    3. He, Wei & Sun, Xiang, 2014. "On the diffuseness of incomplete information game," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 131-137.
    4. Khan, M. Ali & Zhang, Yongchao, 2014. "On the existence of pure-strategy equilibria in games with private information: A complete characterization," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 197-202.
    5. Yang, Jian, 2018. "Game-theoretic modeling of players’ ambiguities on external factors," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 31-56.
    6. Michael Greinecker & Konrad Podczeck, 2015. "Purification and roulette wheels," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 58(2), pages 255-272, February.
    7. Yi-Chun Chen & Xiao Luo & Chen Qu, 2016. "Rationalizability in general situations," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 147-167, January.
    8. Ganguli, Jayant & Heifetz, Aviad & Lee, Byung Soo, 2016. "Universal interactive preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 237-260.
    9. Khan, M. Ali & Rath, Kali P. & Sun, Yeneng & Yu, Haomiao, 2013. "Large games with a bio-social typology," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 1122-1149.
    10. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    11. Dorian Beauchêne, 2016. "Solution concepts for games with ambiguous payoffs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 245-269, February.
    12. Azrieli, Yaron & Teper, Roee, 2011. "Uncertainty aversion and equilibrium existence in games with incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 310-317.
    13. Barelli, Paulo & Duggan, John, 2015. "Purification of Bayes Nash equilibrium with correlated types and interdependent payoffs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-14.
    14. He, Wei & Sun, Yeneng, 2019. "Pure-strategy equilibria in Bayesian games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 11-49.
    15. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    16. Galeazzi, Paolo & Marti, Johannes, 2023. "Choice structures in games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 431-455.
    17. Muraviev, Igor & Riedel, Frank & Sass, Linda, 2017. "Kuhn’s Theorem for extensive form Ellsberg games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 26-41.
    18. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli, 2016. "Strict Nash equilibria in non-atomic games with strict single crossing in players (or types) and actions," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 4(1), pages 95-109, April.
    19. Stauber, Ronald, 2017. "Irrationality and ambiguity in extensive games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 409-432.
    20. Xiao Luo & Yi-Chun Chen, 2004. "A Unified Approach to Information, Knowledge, and Stability," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 472, Econometric Society.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Subjective uncertainty; strategic interaction; strategically irrelevant events; ambiguity; bayesian games;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:the:publsh:2068. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Martin J. Osborne (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://econtheory.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.