On the Impossibility of Predicting the Behavior of Rational Agents
A foundational assumption in economics is that people are rational -- they choose optimal plans of action given their predictions about future states of the world In games of strategy this means that each players?strategy should be optimal given his or her prediction of the opponents?strategies We demonstrate that there is an inherent tension between rationality and prediction when players are uncertain about their opponents?payoff functions Specifically there are games in which it is impossible for perfectly rational players to learn to predict the future behavior of their opponents (even approximately) no matter what learning rule they use The reason is that in trying to predict the next-period behavior of an opponent a rational player must take an action this period that the opponent can observe This observation may cause the opponent to alter his next-period behavior thus invalidating the first player’s prediction The resulting feedback loop has the property that in almost every time period someone predicts that his opponent has a non-negligible probability of choosing one action when in fact the opponent is certain to choose a different action We conclude that there are strategic situations where it is impossible in principle for perfectly rational agents to learn to predict the future behavior of other perfectly rational agents based solely on their observed actions
1. Check below under "Related research" 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.
|Date of creation:||Feb 1999|
|Date of revision:||Jun 2001|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.econ.jhu.edu
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1993.
"Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium,"
Econometric Society, vol. 61(5), pages 1019-45, September.
- Ehud Kalai & Ehud Lehrer, 1990. "Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium," Discussion Papers 925, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Kalai, Ehud & Lehrer, Ehud, 1991. "Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium," Working Papers 91-18, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- E. Kalai & E. Lehrer, 2010. "Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium," Levine's Working Paper Archive 529, David K. Levine.
- Ehud Kalai & Ehud Lehrer, 1990. "Rational Learning Leads to Nash Equilibrium," Discussion Papers 895, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- John H. Nachbar, 2001. "Bayesian learning in repeated games of incomplete information," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 303-326.
- Jordan, J. S., 1991. "Bayesian learning in normal form games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 60-81, February.
- Drew Fudenberg & David Kreps, 2010.
"Learning Mixed Equilibria,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
415, David K. Levine.
- Monderer, Dov & Shapley, Lloyd S., 1996. "Fictitious Play Property for Games with Identical Interests," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 258-265, January.
- John H. Nachbar, 1997.
"Prediction, Optimization, and Learning in Repeated Games,"
Econometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 275-310, March.
- John Nachbar, 2010. "Prediction, Optimization and Learning in Repeated Games," Levine's Working Paper Archive 576, David K. Levine.
- John H. Nachbar, 1995. "Prediction, Optimization, and Learning in Repeated Games," Game Theory and Information 9504001, EconWPA, revised 14 Feb 1996.
- Jordan J. S., 1995. "Bayesian Learning in Repeated Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 8-20, April.
- Ronald Miller & Chris Sanchirico, . "Almost Everybody Disagrees Almost All the Time: The Genericity of Weakly Merging Nowhere," Scholarship at Penn Law upenn_wps-1001, University of Pennsylvania Law School.
- Lehrer, Ehud & Smorodinsky, Rann, 1997. "Repeated Large Games with Incomplete Information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 116-134, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jhu:papers:423. 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: (None)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask None to update the entry or send us the correct address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.