How to Use Decision Theory to Choose Among Mechanisms
AbstractWe extend a recently introduced approach to the positive problem of game theory, Predictive Game Theory (PGT Wolpert (2008). In PGT, modeling a game results in a probability distribution over possible behavior profiles. This contrasts with the conventional approach where modeling a game results in an equilibrium set of possible behavior profiles. We analyze three PGT models. Two of these are based on the well-known quantal response and epsilon equilibrium concepts, while the third is entirely new to the economics literature. We use a Cournot game to demonstrate how to use our extension of PGT, concentrating on model combination, modeler uncertainty, and mechanism design. In particular, we emphasize how PGT allows a modeler to perform prediction and mechanism design in a manner that is fully consistent with decision theory. We do this even in situations where conventional approaches yield multiple equilibria, an ability that is necessary for a fully decision theoretic mechanism design. Where possible, PGT results are compared against equilibrium set analogs.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by American University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 2009-11.
Date of creation: Aug 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.american.edu/cas/economics/
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Vincent P. Crawford, 2006.
"Cognition and Behavior in Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study,"
321307000000000336, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Vincent P. Crawford & Miguel A. Costa-Gomes, 2006. "Cognition and Behavior in Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1737-1768, December.
- Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Vincent P. Crawford, 2004. "Cognition and Behavior in Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000113, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Miguel Costa-Gomes & Vincent P. Crawford, 2004. "Cognition And Behavior In Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000143, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Costa-Gomes, Miguel A. & Crawford, Vincent P., 2004. "Cognition and Behavior in Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt449812fx, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
- Miguel A. Costa-Gomes & Vincent P. Crawford, 2004. "Cognition and Behavior in Two-Person Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," ISER Discussion Paper 0613, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
- Harsanyi, John C., 1994.
"Games with Incomplete Information,"
Nobel Prize in Economics documents
1994-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
- Colin F. Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho & Juin-Kuan Chong, 2004. "A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 119(3), pages 861-898, August.
- Seade, J, 1985. "Profitable Cost Increases and the Shifting of Taxation : Equilibrium Response of Markets in Oligopoly," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 260, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Arthur, W Brian, 1994. "Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(2), pages 406-11, May.
- Radner, Roy, 1980. "Collusive behavior in noncooperative epsilon-equilibria of oligopolies with long but finite lives," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 136-154, April.
- Velu, C. & Iyer, S. & Gair, J.R., 2010. "A Reason for Unreason: Returns-Based Beliefs in Game Theory," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1058, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Meal).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.