IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v13y2022i6p80-d990053.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Games over Probability Distributions Revisited: New Equilibrium Models and Refinements

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Rass

    (LIT Secure and Correct Systems Lab, Johannes Kepler University, 4040 Linz, Austria
    Institute for Artificial Intelligence and Cybersecurity, University of Klagenfurt, 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria)

  • Sandra König

    (Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Digital Safety & Security, Giefinggasse 4, 1210 Vienna, Austria)

  • Stefan Schauer

    (Austrian Institute of Technology, Center for Digital Safety & Security, Giefinggasse 4, 1210 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

This article is an overview of recent progress on a theory of games, whose payoffs are probability distributions rather than real numbers, and which have their equilibria defined and computed over a (suitably restricted yet dense) set of distributions. While the classical method of defining game models with real-valued utility functions has proven strikingly successful in many domains, some use cases from the security area revealed shortcomings of the classical real-valued game models. These issues motivated the use of probability distributions as a more complex object to express revenues. The resulting class of games displays a variety of phenomena not encountered in classical games, such as games that have continuous payoff functions but still no equilibrium, or games that are zero-sum but for which fictitious play does not converge. We discuss suitable restrictions of how such games should be defined to allow the definition of equilibria, and show the notion of a lexicographic Nash equilibrium, as a proposed solution concept in this generalized class of games.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Rass & Sandra König & Stefan Schauer, 2022. "Games over Probability Distributions Revisited: New Equilibrium Models and Refinements," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-26, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:80-:d:990053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/80/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/13/6/80/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thierry Chauveau, 2012. "Subjective risk and disappointment," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12063, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    2. Stefan Rass, 2015. "On Game-Theoretic Risk Management (Part Two) -- Algorithms to Compute Nash-Equilibria in Games with Distributions as Payoffs," Papers 1511.08591, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2020.
    3. Gul, Faruk, 1991. "A Theory of Disappointment Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 667-686, May.
    4. Thierry Chauveau, 2012. "Subjective risk and disappointment," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 12063r, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne, revised Dec 2012.
    5. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    6. Busby, J.S. & Onggo, B.S.S. & Liu, Y., 2016. "Agent-based computational modelling of social risk responses," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 1029-1042.
    7. Faustino Acosta Ortega & Carlos Rafels Pallarola, 2005. "Security Strategies and Equilibria in Multiobjective Matrix Games," Working Papers in Economics 128, Universitat de Barcelona. Espai de Recerca en Economia.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    2. Abdellaoui, Mohammed & Bleichrodt, Han, 2007. "Eliciting Gul's theory of disappointment aversion by the tradeoff method," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 631-645, December.
    3. Fong, Wai Mun & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Wong, Wing Keung, 2008. "Stochastic dominance and behavior towards risk: The market for Internet stocks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 194-208, October.
    4. Han Bleichrodt & Jose Maria Abellan-Perpiñan & Jose Luis Pinto-Prades & Ildefonso Mendez-Martinez, 2007. "Resolving Inconsistencies in Utility Measurement Under Risk: Tests of Generalizations of Expected Utility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 469-482, March.
    5. Latifa Ghalayini & Dana Deeb, 2021. "Utility Measurement in Integrative Negotiation," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15.
    6. Han Bleichrodt & José-Luis Pinto-Prades, 2004. "The Validity of QALYs Under Non-Expected Utility," Working Papers 113, Barcelona School of Economics.
    7. Zvi Safra & Uzi Segal, 2005. "Are Universal Preferences Possible? Calibration Results for Non-Expected Utility Theories," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 633, Boston College Department of Economics.
    8. Stefan Rass & Sandra König & Stefan Schauer, 2017. "Defending Against Advanced Persistent Threats Using Game-Theory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-43, January.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2021. "A simple non-parametric method for eliciting prospect theory's value function and measuring loss aversion under risk and ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 403-416, October.
    11. Kam Yu, 2009. "Measuring the Output and Prices of the Lottery Sector: An Application of Implicit Expected Utility Theory," NBER Chapters, in: Price Index Concepts and Measurement, pages 405-425, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Knight Fever towards an Economics of Awards," IEW - Working Papers 239, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Walther Herbert, 2005. "Optimal Taxation of Gambling and Lotto," Working Papers geewp47, Vienna University of Economics and Business Research Group: Growth and Employment in Europe: Sustainability and Competitiveness.
    14. Andrea Morone & Ulrich Schmidt, 2008. "An Experimental Investigation of Alternatives to Expected Utility Using Pricing Data," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(20), pages 1-12.
    15. Helga Fehr-Duda & Thomas Epper, 2012. "Probability and Risk: Foundations and Economic Implications of Probability-Dependent Risk Preferences," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 567-593, July.
    16. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy & Francesco Feri, 2018. "Violations of betweenness and choice shifts in groups," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 321-331, October.
    17. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    18. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, "undated". "A Stochastic Expected Utility Theory," IEW - Working Papers 231, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    19. Sagi, Jacob S., 2006. "Anchored preference relations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 283-295, September.
    20. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2008:i:20:p:1-12 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Olivier L’Haridon, 2013. "La rationalité à l'épreuve de l'économie comportementale," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 35-89.
    22. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.

    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:gam:jgames:v:13:y:2022:i:6:p:80-:d:990053. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.