In: Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications
This chapter of the Handbook of Game Theory (Vol. 3) provides an overview of the theory of Nash equilibrium and its refinements. The starting-point is the rationalistic approach to games and the question whether there exists a convincing, self-enforcing theory of rational behavior in non-cooperative games. Given the assumption of independent behavior of the players, it follows that a self-enforcing theory has to prescribe a Nash equilibrium, i.e., a strategy profile such that no player can gain by a unilateral deviation. Nash equilibria exist and for generic (finite) games there is a finite number of Nash equilibrium outcomes. The chapter first describes some general properties of Nash equilibria. Next it reviews the arguments why not all Nash equilibria can be considered self-enforcing. For example, some equilibria do not satisfy a backward induction property: as soon as a certain subgame is reached, a player has an incentive to deviate. The concepts of subgame perfect equilibria, perfect equilibria and sequential equilibria are introduced to solve this problem. The chapter defines these concepts, derives properties of these concepts and relates them to other refinements such as proper equilibria and persistent equilibria. It turns out that none of these concepts is fully satisfactory as the outcomes that are implied by any of these concepts are not invariant w.r.t. inessential changes in the game. In addition, these concepts do not satisfy a forward induction requirement. The chapter continues with formalizing these notions and it describes concepts of stable equilibria that do satisfy these properties. This set-valued concept is then related to the other refinements. In the final section of the chapter, the theory of equilibrium selection that was proposed by Harsanyi and Selten is described and applied to several examples. This theory selects a unique equilibrium for every game. Some drawbacks of this theory are noted and avenues for future research are indicated.
|This chapter was published in: ||This item is provided by Elsevier in its series Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications with number
3-41.||Handle:|| RePEc:eee:gamchp:3-41||Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookseriesdescription.cws_home/BS_HE/description|
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.:
- Basu, K. & Weibull, J., 1990.
"Strategy Subsets Closed Under Rational Behavior,"
62, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
- Banks, Jeffrey S. & Sobel, Joel., 1985.
"Equilibrium Selection in Signaling Games,"
565, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Aumann, Robert J. & Sorin, Sylvain, 1989. "Cooperation and bounded recall," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 5-39, March.
- Blume, Lawrence E & Zame, William R, 1994.
"The Algebraic Geometry of Perfect and Sequential Equilibrium,"
Econometric Society, vol. 62(4), pages 783-94, July.
- Lawrence E. Blume & William R. Zame, 1993. "The Algebraic Geometry of Perfect and Sequential Equilibrium," Game Theory and Information 9309001, EconWPA.
- Binmore, Ken, 1988. "Modeling Rational Players: Part II," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(01), pages 9-55, April.
- Aumann, Robert & Brandenburger, Adam, 1995.
"Epistemic Conditions for Nash Equilibrium,"
Econometric Society, vol. 63(5), pages 1161-80, September.
- Aumann, Robert J., 1974.
"Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies,"
Journal of Mathematical Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 67-96, March.
- R. Aumann, 2010. "Subjectivity and Correlation in Randomized Strategies," Levine's Working Paper Archive 389, David K. Levine.
- AUMANN, Robert J., . "Subjectivity and correlation in randomized strategies," CORE Discussion Papers RP 167, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Kyle Bagwell & Garey Ramey, 1996.
"Capacity, Entry, and Forward Induction,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 660-680, Winter.
- Kaushik Basu, 2010.
"Strategic Irrationality in Extensive Games,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
375, David K. Levine.
- Blume, A., 1992.
"Equilibrium Refinements in Sender-Receiver Games,"
92-12, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
- Bernheim, B. Douglas & Peleg, Bezalel & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria I. Concepts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-12, June.
- Binmore, Ken, 1987. "Modeling Rational Players: Part I," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(02), pages 179-214, October.
- Blume, A., 1993.
"Neighborhood Stability in Sender-Receiver Games,"
93-15, University of Iowa, Department of Economics.
- Battigalli, Pierpaolo, 1997. "On Rationalizability in Extensive Games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 40-61, May.
- Bernheim, B. Douglas & Whinston, Michael D., 1987. "Coalition-Proof Nash Equilibria II. Applications," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 13-29, June.
- Douglas Bernheim, B. & Ray, Debraj, 1989. "Collective dynamic consistency in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 295-326, December.
- Cho, In-Koo & Sobel, Joel, 1990. "Strategic stability and uniqueness in signaling games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 381-413, April.
- Basu, Kaushik, 1990. "On the Non-existence of a Rationality Definition for Extensive Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 33-44.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamchp:3-41. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.