IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Stochastic Evolution of Rules for Playing Finite Normal Form Games

  • Fabrizio Germano

    ()

The evolution of boundedly rational rules for playing normal form games is studied within stationary environments of stochastically changing games. Rules are viewed as algorithms prescribing strategies for the different normal form games that arise. It is shown that many of the “folk resultsâ€\x9D of evolutionary game theory, typically obtained with a fixed game and fixed strategies, carry over to the present environments. The results are also related to some recent experiments on rules and games. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

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.

File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11238-007-9032-8
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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.

Article provided by Springer in its journal Theory and Decision.

Volume (Year): 62 (2007)
Issue (Month): 4 (May)
Pages: 311-333

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:62:y:2007:i:4:p:311-333
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100341

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.:

as in new window
  1. Broseta, Bruno & Costa-Gomes, Miguel & Crawford, Vincent P., 2000. "Cognition and Behavior in Normal-Form Games: An Experimental Study," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt0fp8278k, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
  2. Dale O. Stahl, 1999. "Evidence based rules and learning in symmetric normal-form games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(1), pages 111-130.
  3. Ed Hopkins, 2001. "Two Competing Models of How People Learn in Games," NajEcon Working Paper Reviews 625018000000000226, www.najecon.org.
  4. Fabrizio Germano, 2004. "Stochastic evolution of rules for playing normal form games," Economics Working Papers 761, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  5. Hart, Sergiu & Mas-Colell, Andreu, 2003. "Regret-based continuous-time dynamics," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 375-394, November.
  6. Samuelson, Larry & Zhang, Jianbo, 1992. "Evolutionary stability in asymmetric games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 363-391, August.
  7. Ritzberger, Klaus & Weibull, Jorgen W, 1995. "Evolutionary Selection in Normal-Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1371-99, November.
  8. Yannick Viossat, 2007. "The replicator dynamics does not lead to correlated equilibria," Post-Print hal-00664293, HAL.
  9. Antonio Cabrales & Joel Sobel, 2010. "On the Limit Points of Discrete Selection Dynamics," Levine's Working Paper Archive 432, David K. Levine.
  10. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
  11. Samuelson, L. & Zhang, J., 1991. "Evolutionary Stability in Asymmetric Games," Papers 9132, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
  12. Rankin, Frederick W. & Van Huyck, John B. & Battalio, Raymond C., 2000. "Strategic Similarity and Emergent Conventions: Evidence from Similar Stag Hunt Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 315-337, August.
  13. A. Cabrales, 2010. "Stochastic Replicator Dynamics," Levine's Working Paper Archive 489, David K. Levine.
  14. Dale O. Stahl, 1997. "Rule Learning in Symmetric Normal-Form Games: Theory and Evidence," CARE Working Papers 9710, The University of Texas at Austin, Center for Applied Research in Economics.
  15. Selten, R. & Abbink, K. & Buchta, J. & Sadrieh, A., 2002. "How to Play 3x3 Games : A Strategy Method Experiment," Discussion Paper 2002-39, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  16. LiCalzi Marco, 1995. "Fictitious Play by Cases," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 64-89, October.
  17. Sergiu Hart & Andreu Mas-Colell, 1999. "A General Class of Adaptive Strategies," Game Theory and Information 9904001, EconWPA, revised 23 Mar 2000.
  18. Nachbar, J H, 1990. ""Evolutionary" Selection Dynamics in Games: Convergence and Limit Properties," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 19(1), pages 59-89.
  19. Heller, Dana, 2004. "An evolutionary approach to learning in a changing environment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 114(1), pages 31-55, January.
  20. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "Learning in Games," Levine's Working Paper Archive 2222, David K. Levine.
  21. Daniel John Zizzo & Daniel Sgroi, 2001. "Bounded-Rational Behavior by Neural Networks in Normal Form Games," Economics Series Working Papers 2000-W30, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  22. Sergiu Hart & Andreu Mas-Colell, 2003. "Uncoupled Dynamics Do Not Lead to Nash Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1830-1836, December.
  23. Juang, Wei-Torng, 2002. "Rule Evolution and Equilibrium Selection," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 71-90, April.
  24. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "Evolutionary Games in Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 637-66, May.
  25. D. Sgroi & D. J. Zizzo, 2002. "Strategy Learning in 3x3 Games by Neural Networks," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0207, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  26. Rosenthal, R W, 1979. "Sequences of Games with Varying Opponents," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(6), pages 1353-66, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:62:y:2007:i:4:p:311-333. 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: (Sonal Shukla)

or (Rebekah McClure)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.