IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00530593.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Perceptron versus Automaton in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvain Béal

    (GATE Lyon Saint-Étienne - Groupe d'analyse et de théorie économique - ENS Lyon - École normale supérieure - Lyon - UL2 - Université Lumière - Lyon 2 - UCBL - Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 - Université de Lyon - UJM - Université Jean Monnet [Saint-Étienne] - Université de Lyon - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvain Béal, 2010. "Perceptron versus Automaton in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," Post-Print halshs-00530593, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00530593
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00530593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jim Engle-Warnick & Robert Slonim, 2006. "Inferring repeated-game strategies from actions: evidence from trust game experiments," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(3), pages 603-632, August.
    2. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1993. "On Price Recognition and Computational Complexity in a Monopolistic Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 473-484, June.
    3. Cho, In-Koo, 1996. "On the Complexity of Repeated Principal Agent Games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Neyman, Abraham, 1985. "Bounded complexity justifies cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 227-229.
    5. Gilboa, Itzhak & Samet, Dov, 1989. "Bounded versus unbounded rationality: The tyranny of the weak," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 213-221, September.
    6. Kalai, Ehud & Stanford, William, 1988. "Finite Rationality and Interpersonal Complexity in Repeated Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 397-410, March.
    7. Drew Fudenberg & Eric Maskin, 2008. "The Folk Theorem In Repeated Games With Discounting Or With Incomplete Information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Drew Fudenberg & David K Levine (ed.), A Long-Run Collaboration On Long-Run Games, chapter 11, pages 209-230, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Abraham Neyman & Daijiro Okada, 2000. "Two-person repeated games with finite automata," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 29(3), pages 309-325.
    9. Cho, In-Koo, 1996. "Perceptrons Play Repeated Games with Imperfect Monitoring," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 22-53, September.
    10. Devetag, Giovanna & Warglien, Massimo, 2003. "Games and phone numbers: Do short-term memory bounds affect strategic behavior?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 189-202, April.
    11. Ehud Kalai, 1987. "Bounded Rationality and Strategic Complexity in Repeated Games," Discussion Papers 783, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2011. "Cognitive load in the multi-player prisoner's dilemma game," MPRA Paper 30856, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Duffy, Sean & Smith, John, 2014. "Cognitive load in the multi-player prisoner's dilemma game: Are there brains in games?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 47-56.

    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. Kalai, E & Neme, A, 1992. "The Strength of a Little Perfection," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 20(4), pages 335-355.
    2. David Baron & Ehud Kalai, 1990. "Dividing a Cake by Majority: The Simplest Equilibria," Discussion Papers 919, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    3. Gilboa Itzhak & Schmeidler David, 1994. "Infinite Histories and Steady Orbits in Repeated Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 370-399, May.
    4. van Damme, E.E.C., 1995. "Game theory : The next stage," Other publications TiSEM 7779b0f9-bef5-45c7-ae6b-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Hernández, Penélope & Urbano, Amparo, 2008. "Codification schemes and finite automata," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 395-409, November.
    6. Tobie Cusson & Jim Engle-Warnick, 2013. "Observing the Strategies Subjects Identify from Choice Data in a Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma," CIRANO Working Papers 2013s-26, CIRANO.
    7. Béal, Sylvain, 2007. "Perceptron Versus Automaton∗," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-58, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    8. Ehud Kalai, 1995. "Games," Discussion Papers 1141, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    9. Ioannou, Christos A. & Romero, Julian, 2014. "A generalized approach to belief learning in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 178-203.
    10. Guilherme Carmona, 2003. "A re-interpretation of the concept of nash equilibrium based on the notion of social institutions," FEUNL Working Paper Series wp425, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    11. Neme, Alejandro & Quintas, Luis, 1992. "Equilibrium of repeated games with cost of implementation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 105-109, October.
    12. Lance Fortnow & Rahul Santhanam, 2009. "Bounding Rationality by Discounting Time," Discussion Papers 1481, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    13. Renault, Jérôme & Scarsini, Marco & Tomala, Tristan, 2008. "Playing off-line games with bounded rationality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 207-223, September.
    14. Guilherme Carmona, 2003. "A Re-Interpretation of Nash Equilibrium Based on the Notion of Social Institutions," Game Theory and Information 0311005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Mehmet Barlo & Guilherme Carmona, 2007. "One - memory in repeated games," FEUNL Working Paper Series wp500, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Economia.
    16. Jehiel, Philippe, 1998. "Learning to Play Limited Forecast Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 274-298, February.
    17. Jehiel, Philippe, 2005. "Analogy-based expectation equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 81-104, August.
    18. Ho, Teck-Hua, 1996. "Finite automata play repeated prisoner's dilemma with information processing costs," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(1-3), pages 173-207.
    19. Beal, Sylvain & Querou, Nicolas, 2007. "Bounded rationality and repeated network formation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 71-89, July.
    20. David Hugh-Jones & Ro’i Zultan, 2013. "Reputation and Cooperation in Defense," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 57(2), pages 327-355, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    perceptron; automaton;

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00530593. 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: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.