IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!)

Citations for "Order Independence for Iterated Weak Dominance"

by Marx, Leslie M. & Swinkels, Jeroen M.

For a complete description of this item, click here. For a RSS feed for citations of this item, click here.
as
in new window


  1. Marx, Leslie M. & Swinkels, Jeroen M., 2000. "Order Independence for Iterated Weak Dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 324-329, May.
  2. Adam Brandenburger & Amanda Friedenberg, 2014. "Self-Admissible Sets," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 8, pages 213-249 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
  3. Mailath, George J. & Samuelson, Larry & Swinkels, Jeroen M., 1997. "How Proper Is Sequential Equilibrium?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 193-218, February.
  4. Chen, Yi-Chun & Long, Ngo Van & Luo, Xiao, 2007. "Iterated strict dominance in general games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 299-315, November.
  5. Maxwell Pak & Bing Xu, 2016. "Generalized reinforcement learning in perfect-information games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 45(4), pages 985-1011, November.
  6. repec:cdl:ucsbec:6-98 is not listed on IDEAS
  7. Kei Kawai & Yasutora Watanabe, 2013. "Inferring Strategic Voting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 624-662, April.
  8. Enriqueta Aragonès & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2013. "Imperfectly Informed Voters and Strategic Extremism," Working Papers 725, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
  9. Dhillon, Amrita & Lockwood, Ben, 2004. "When are plurality rule voting games dominance-solvable?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 55-75, January.
  10. Adam Brandenburger & Amanda Friedenberg, 2014. "Intrinsic Correlation in Games," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 4, pages 59-111 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
  11. Dufwenberg, Martin & Stegeman, Mark, 1999. "When Order matters for Iterated Strict Dominance," Research Papers in Economics 1999:2, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
  12. Mario Gilli, 2002. "Iterated Admissibility as Solution Concept in Game Theory," Working Papers 47, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2002.
  13. Shimoji, Makoto, 2004. "On the equivalence of weak dominance and sequential best response," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 385-402, August.
  14. Hon-Snir, Shlomit & Monderer, Dov & Sela, Aner, 1998. "A Learning Approach to Auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 65-88, September.
  15. Kultti, Klaus & Salonen, Hannu, 1997. "Undominated Equilibria in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 98-115, January.
  16. Patrick Hummel, 2008. "Iterative elimination of weakly dominated strategies in binary voting agendas with sequential voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 257-269, August.
  17. Sobel, Joel, 2017. "A note on pre-play communication," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 477-486.
  18. Antonio Cabrales & Giovanni Ponti, 2000. "Implementation, Elimination of Weakly Dominated Strategies and Evolutionary Dynamics," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 3(2), pages 247-282, April.
  19. Christopher Tyson, 2010. "Dominance solvability of dynamic bargaining games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 43(3), pages 457-477, June.
  20. Yukio KORIYAMA & Matias Nunez, 2014. "Hybrid Procedures," THEMA Working Papers 2014-02, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
  21. Aviad Heifetz & Andrés Perea, 2015. "On the outcome equivalence of backward induction and extensive form rationalizability," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 44(1), pages 37-59, February.
  22. Amanda Friedenberg, 2006. "Can Hidden Variables Explain Correlation? (joint with Adam Brandenburger)," Theory workshop papers 815595000000000005, UCLA Department of Economics.
  23. Kamecke, Ulrich, 2001. "Dominance solvable English matching auctions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 253-269, November.
  24. Shimoji, Makoto & Watson, Joel, 1998. "Conditional Dominance, Rationalizability, and Game Forms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 161-195, December.
  25. Akiko Maruyama & Takashi Shimizu & Kazuhiro Yamamoto, 2009. "Exit and Voice in a Marriage Market," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 09-04, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics and Osaka School of International Public Policy (OSIPP).
  26. Lucia Buenrostro & Amrita Dhillon & Peter Vida, 2013. "Scoring rule voting games and dominance solvability," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 329-352, February.
  27. Licun Xue, "undated". "A Notion of Consistent Rationalizability - Between Weak and Pearce's Extensive Form Rationalizability," Economics Working Papers 2000-4, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
  28. Osterdal, Lars Peter, 2005. "Iterated weak dominance and subgame dominance," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 637-645, September.
  29. Michael Trost, 2012. "An Epistemic Rationale for Order-Independence," Jena Economic Research Papers 2012-010, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  30. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Elsevier.
This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.