IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirwor/2002s-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Hypergame Analysis in E-Commerce: A Preliminary Report

Author

Listed:
  • Maxime Leclerc
  • Brahim Chaib-draa

Abstract

In usual game theory, it is normally assumed that "all the players see the same game"", i.e., they are aware of each other's strategies and preferences. This assumption is very strong for real life where differences in perception affecting the decision making process seem to be the rule rather the exception. Attempts have been made to incorporate misperceptions of various types, but most of these attempts are based on quantities (as probabilities, risk factors, etc.) which are too subjective in general. One approach that seems to be very attractive is to consider that the players are trying to play ""different games"" in a hypergame. In this paper, we present a hypergame approach as an analysis tool in the context of multiagent environments. Precisely, we first sketch a brief formal introduction to hypergames. Then we explain how agents can interact through communication or through a mediator when they have different views and particularly misperceptions on others' games. After that, we show how agents can take advantage of misperceptions. Finally, we conclude and present some future work." Dans les jeux classiques, il est supposé que "tous les joueurs voient le même jeu'', i.e., que les joueurs sont au courant des stratégies et des préférences des uns et des autres. Aux vu des applications réelles, cette supposition est très forte dans la mesure où les différences de perception affectant la prise de décision semblent plus relevées de la règle que de l'exception. Des tentatives ont été faites, par le passé, pour incorporer les distorsions aux niveaux des perceptions, mais la plupart de ces tentatives ont été essentiellement basées sur le ""quantitatif"" (comme les probabilités, les facteurs de risques, etc.) et par conséquent, trop subjectives en général. Une approche qui semble être attractive pour pallier à cela, consiste à voir les joueurs comme jouant ""différents jeux'' dans une sorte d'hyper-jeu. Dans ce papier, nous présentons une approche ""hyper-jeu'' comme outil d'analyse entre agents dans le cadre d'un environnement multi-agent. Nous donnons un aperçu (très succinct) de la formalisation d'un tel hyper-jeux et nous expliquerons ensuite, comment les agents pourraient intervenir via un agent-médiateur quand ils ont des perceptions différentes. Après cela, nous expliquerons comment les agents pourraient tirer avantage des perceptions différentes."

Suggested Citation

  • Maxime Leclerc & Brahim Chaib-draa, 2002. "Hypergame Analysis in E-Commerce: A Preliminary Report," CIRANO Working Papers 2002s-66, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirwor:2002s-66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2002s-66.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Aumann, 1995. "Repeated Games with Incomplete Information," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011476, December.
    2. Adam Brandenburger & Eddie Dekel, 2014. "Hierarchies of Beliefs and Common Knowledge," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 2, pages 31-41, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Harsanyi, John C, 1995. "Games with Incomplete Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 291-303, June.
    4. Ronald Fagin & Joseph Y. Halpern & Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi, 2003. "Reasoning About Knowledge," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262562006, December.
    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. Shmuel Zamir, 2008. "Bayesian games: Games with incomplete information," Discussion Paper Series dp486, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    2. Board, Oliver, 2004. "Dynamic interactive epistemology," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 49-80, October.
    3. Heifetz, Aviad & Samet, Dov, 1998. "Topology-Free Typology of Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 324-341, October.
    4. Áron Tóbiás, 2023. "Cognitive limits and preferences for information," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 46(1), pages 221-253, June.
    5. Dirk Bergemann & Stephen Morris, 2012. "Robust Mechanism Design," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Robust Mechanism Design The Role of Private Information and Higher Order Beliefs, chapter 2, pages 49-96, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Faruk Gul, 1997. "A Nobel Prize for Game Theorists: The Contributions of Harsanyi, Nash and Selten," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 159-174, Summer.
    7. Galeazzi, Paolo & Marti, Johannes, 2023. "Choice structures in games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 431-455.
    8. José Penalva & Michael D. Ryall, 2001. "Causal assessment in finite extensive-form games," Economics Working Papers 483, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Sep 2003.
    9. ,, 2008. "Subjective expected utility in games," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(3), September.
    10. John Geanakoplos & (**), Moshe Y. Vardi & Joseph Y. Halpern & Ronald Fagin, 1999. "The hierarchical approach to modeling knowledge and common knowledge," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 28(3), pages 331-365.
    11. , & , & ,, 2006. "Topologies on types," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(3), pages 275-309, September.
    12. Weinstein, Jonathan & Yildiz, Muhamet, 2007. "Impact of higher-order uncertainty," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 200-212, July.
    13. Mariotti, Thomas & Meier, Martin & Piccione, Michele, 2005. "Hierarchies of beliefs for compact possibility models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 303-324, April.
    14. , & , & ,, 2007. "Interim correlated rationalizability," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 2(1), pages 15-40, March.
    15. Áron Tóbiás, 2021. "Meet meets join: the interaction between pooled and common knowledge," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 50(4), pages 989-1019, December.
    16. Alejandro Melo Ponce, 2018. "The Secret Behind The Tortoise and the Hare: Information Design in Contests," 2018 Papers pme809, Job Market Papers.
    17. Heifetz, Aviad & Samet, Dov, 1999. "Hierarchies of knowledge: an unbounded stairway," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 157-170, September.
    18. MEIER, Martin, 2001. "An infinitary probability logic for type spaces," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2001061, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    19. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "Bayesian game theorists and non-Bayesian players," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1420-1454, November.
    20. Jonathan Weinstein & Muhamet Yildiz, 2004. "Finite-Order Implications of Any Equilibrium," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000065, David K. Levine.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cir:cirwor:2002s-66. 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: Webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.html .

    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.