Cooperative VS. Non-cooperative Truels: Little Agreement, but Does that Matter?
AbstractIt is well-known that non-cooperative and cooperative game theory may yield different solutions to games. These differences are particularly dramatic in the case of truels, or three-person duels, in which the players may fire sequentially or simultaneously, and the games may be one-round or n-round. Thus, it is never a Nash equilibrium for all players to hold their fire in any of these games, whereas in simultaneous one-round and n-round truels such cooperation, wherein everybody survives, is in both the a -core and ß -core. On the other hand, both cores may be empty, indicating a lack of stability, when the unique Nash equilibrium is one survivor. Conditions under which each approach seems most applicable are discussed. Although it might be desirable to subsume the two approaches within a unified framework, such unification seems unlikely since the two approaches are grounded in fundamentally different notions of stability.
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 Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques in its series Cahiers de recherche with number 2000-15.
Length: 18 pages
Date of creation: 2000
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: CP 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec, H3C 3J7
Phone: (514) 343-6540
Fax: (514) 343-5831
Web page: http://www.sceco.umontreal.ca
More information through EDIRC
truels; noncoorative games; cores;
Other versions of this item:
- Bossert, Walter & Brams, Steven J. & Kilgour, D. Marc, 2002. "Cooperative vs non-cooperative truels: little agreement, but does that matter?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 185-202, August.
- Bossert, W. & Brams, S.J. & Kilgour, D.M., 2000. "Cooperative VS. Non-cooperative Truels: Little Agreement, but Does that Matter?," Cahiers de recherche 2000-15, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
- Bossert, W. & Brams, S. J. & Kilgour, D. M., 2000. "Cooperative vs. Non-Cooperative Truels: Little Agreement, But Does That Matter?," Working Papers 00-19, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
- C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
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.:
- Steven Brams & D. Kilgour, 1998.
"Backward Induction Is Not Robust: The Parity Problem and the Uncertainty Problem,"
Theory and Decision,
Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 263-289, December.
- Kilgour, D.M. & Brams, S.J., 1996. "Backward Induction is not Robust: The Parity Problem and the Uncertainty Problem," Working Papers 96-21, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- David Rietzke & Brian Roberson, 2013. "The robustness of ‘enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend’ alliances," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 937-956, April.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sharon BREWER).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.