IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probabilities on streams and reflexive games


  • Andrew Schumann


Probability measures on streams (e.g. on hypernumbers and p-adic numbers) have been defined. It was shown that these probabilities can be used for simulations of reflexive games. In particular, it can be proved that Aumann’s agreement theorem does not hold for these probabilities. Instead of this theorem, there is a statement that is called the reflexion disagreement theorem. Based on this theorem, probabilistic and knowledge conditions can be defined for reflexive games at various reflexion levels up to the infinite level.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Schumann, 2014. "Probabilities on streams and reflexive games," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 24(1), pages 71-96.
  • Handle: RePEc:wut:journl:v:1:y:2014:p:71-96:id:1074
    DOI: 10.5277/ord140105

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Heifetz, Aviad, 1996. "Non-well-founded-Type Spaces," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 202-217, October.
    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. Barry O'Neill, 2018. "Two-Party Agreements as Circular Sets," Discussion Paper Series dp722, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    2. Can Baskent, 2014. "Some Non-Classical Approaches to the Branderburger-Keisler Paradox," Working Papers hal-01094784, HAL.
    3. Tohme, Fernando, 2005. "Existence and definability of states of the world," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 81-100, January.


    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:wut:journl:v:1:y:2014:p:71-96:id:1074. 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: . General contact details of provider: .

    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: Adam Kasperski (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.