IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/safiwp/01-08-043.html

Non-Explanatory Equilibria: An Extremely Simple Game With (Mostly) Unattainable Fixed Points

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua M. Epstein
  • Ross A. Hammond

Abstract

Equilibrium analysis pervades mathematical social science. This paper calls into question the explanatory significance of equilibrium by offering an extremely simple game, most of whose equilibria are unattainable in principle from any of its initial conditions. Moreover, the number of computation steps required to reach those (few) equilibria that are attainable is shown to grow exponentially with the number of players--making long-run equilibrium a poor predictor of the gameâs observed state. The paper also poses a number of combinatorially challenging problems raised by the model.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua M. Epstein & Ross A. Hammond, 2001. "Non-Explanatory Equilibria: An Extremely Simple Game With (Mostly) Unattainable Fixed Points," Working Papers 01-08-043, Santa Fe Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:wop:safiwp:01-08-043
    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
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dean Foster & H Peyton Young, 1999. "On the Impossibility of Predicting the Behavior of Rational Agents," Economics Working Paper Archive 423, The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics, revised Jun 2001.
    2. John H. Nachbar, 1997. "Prediction, Optimization, and Learning in Repeated Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(2), pages 275-310, March.
    3. Prasad, Kislaya, 1997. "On the computability of Nash equilibria," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(6), pages 943-953, June.
    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. Thomas Norman, 2012. "Almost-Rational Learning of Nash Equilibrium without Absolute Continuity," Economics Series Working Papers 602, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    2. Thomas Norman, 2012. "Learning Within Rational-Expectations Equilibrium," Economics Series Working Papers 591, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    3. Norman, Thomas W.L., 2022. "The possibility of Bayesian learning in repeated games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 142-152.
    4. Burkhard C. Schipper, 2022. "Strategic Teaching and Learning in Games," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 321-352, August.
    5. Norman, Thomas W.L., 2015. "Learning, hypothesis testing, and rational-expectations equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 93-105.
    6. Young, H. Peyton, 2002. "On the limits to rational learning," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 791-799, May.
    7. Anke Gerber, "undated". "Learning in and about Games," IEW - Working Papers 234, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    8. Foster, Dean P. & Young, H. Peyton, 2003. "Learning, hypothesis testing, and Nash equilibrium," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 73-96, October.
    9. Levy, Yehuda John, 2015. "Limits to rational learning," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-23.
    10. Burkhard Schipper, 2015. "Strategic teaching and learning in games," Working Papers 151, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    11. Joshua M. Epstein, 2007. "Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science," Introductory Chapters, in: Generative Social Science Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling, Princeton University Press.
    12. Jehiel, Philippe, 1998. "Learning to Play Limited Forecast Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 274-298, February.
    13. Kocherlakota, Narayana R., 2019. "Practical policy evaluation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 29-45.
    14. Yakov Babichenko, 2010. "Completely Uncoupled Dynamics and Nash Equilibria," Discussion Paper Series dp529, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    15. Anderlini, Luca & Sabourian, Hamid, 2001. "Cooperation and computability in n-player games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 99-137, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Sandroni, Alvaro, 2000. "Reciprocity and Cooperation in Repeated Coordination Games: The Principled-Player Approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 157-182, August.
    18. Ying-Fang Kao & Ragupathy Venkatachalam, 2021. "Human and Machine Learning," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 57(3), pages 889-909, March.
    19. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    20. Georges, Christophre, 2006. "Learning with misspecification in an artificial currency market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 70-84, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wop:safiwp:01-08-043. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/epstfus.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.