Two equivalence results for two-person strict games
A game is strict if for both players, different profiles have different payoffs. Two games are best response equivalent if their best response functions are the same. We prove that a two-person strict game has at most one pure Nash equilibrium if and only if it is best response equivalent to a strictly competitive game, and that it is best response equivalent to an ordinal potential game if and only if it is best response equivalent to a quasi-supermodular game.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Zhou Lin, 1994. "The Set of Nash Equilibria of a Supermodular Game Is a Complete Lattice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 295-300, September.
- Echenique, Federico, 2004.
"A characterization of strategic complementarities,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 325-347, February.
- Federico Echenique, 2001. "A Characterization of Strategic Complementarities," GE, Growth, Math methods 0103001, EconWPA.
- Federico Echenique., 2001. "A Characterization of Strategic Complementarities," Economics Working Papers E01-299, University of California at Berkeley.
- Echenique, Federico, 2002. "A Characterization of Strategic Complementarities," Working Papers 1142, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Echenique, Federico, 2001. "A Characterization of Strategic Complementarities," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt5w13s4z2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Federico Echenique, 2001. "A characterization of strategic complementarities," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0501, Department of Economics - dECON.
- Voorneveld, Mark, 2000. "Best-response potential games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 289-295, March.
- Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, July.
- Martin J Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 2009. "A Course in Game Theory," Levine's Bibliography 814577000000000225, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Berger, Ulrich, 2007. "Two more classes of games with the continuous-time fictitious play property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 247-261, August.
- Monderer, Dov & Shapley, Lloyd S., 1996. "Potential Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 124-143, May.
- Nikolai S. Kukushkin & Satoru Takahashi & Tetsuo Yamamori, 2005. "Improvement dynamics in games with strategic complementarities," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 33(2), pages 229-238, 06. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:71:y:2011:i:2:p:479-486. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.