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

Citations for "Order Independence for Iterated Weak Dominance"

by Leslie McFarland-Marx & Jeroen M. Swinkels

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. 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.
  2. Shimoji, Makoto & Watson, Joel, 1998. "Conditional Dominance, Rationalizability, and Game Forms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 161-195, December.
  3. 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.
  4. Brandenburger, Adam & Friedenberg, Amanda, 2010. "Self-admissible sets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 785-811, March.
    • 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..
  5. 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.
  6. Antonio Cabrales & Giovanni Ponti, 1997. "Implementation, elimination of weakly dominated strategies and evolutionary dynamics," Economics Working Papers 221, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  7. Dufwenberg, Martin & Stegeman, Mark, 1999. "When Order matters for Iterated Strict Dominance," Research Papers in Economics 1999:2, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
  8. Marx, Leslie M. & Swinkels, Jeroen M., 1997. "Order Independence for Iterated Weak Dominance," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 219-245, February.
  9. 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).
  10. Yasutora Watanabe & Kei Kawai, 2009. "Inferring Strategic Voting," 2009 Meeting Papers 803, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  11. George J. Mailath, 1996. "How Proper is Sequential Equilibrium?," Discussion Papers 1161, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  12. Buenrostro, Lucia & Dhillon, Amrita, 2004. "Scoring Rule Voting Games And Dominance Solvability," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 698, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  13. Yi-Chun Chen & Ngo Van Long & Xiao Luo, 2007. "Iterated Strict Dominance in General Games," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-03, CIRANO.
  14. Lars Peter Østerdal, 2003. "Iterated weak dominance and subgame dominance," Discussion Papers 03-07, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
  15. Brandenburger, Adam & Friedenberg, Amanda, 2008. "Intrinsic correlation in games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 28-67, July.
  16. Monderer, Dov & Shlomit Hon-Snir & Aner Sela, 1996. "A Learning Approach to Auctions," Discussion Paper Serie B 388, University of Bonn, Germany.
  17. 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.
  18. Yukio KORIYAMA & Matias Nunez, 2014. "Hybrid Procedures," THEMA Working Papers 2014-02, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
  19. Enriqueta Aragones & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2013. "Imperfectly informed voters and strategic extremism," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 938.13, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  20. Michael Trost, 2012. "An Epistemic Rationale for Order-Independence," Jena Economic Research Papers 2012-010, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
  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. Kamecke, Ulrich, 2001. "Dominance solvable English matching auctions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 253-269, November.
  23. Kultti, Klaus & Salonen, Hannu, 1997. "Undominated Equilibria in Games with Strategic Complementarities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 98-115, January.
  24. Mario Gilli, 2002. "Iterated Admissibility as Solution Concept in Game Theory," Working Papers 47, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Mar 2002.
  25. Amanda Friedenberg, 2006. "Can Hidden Variables Explain Correlation? (joint with Adam Brandenburger)," Theory workshop papers 815595000000000005, UCLA Department of Economics.
  26. Dekel, Eddie & Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2015. "Epistemic Game Theory," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, volume 4, chapter 12, pages 619-702 Elsevier.
  27. repec:cdl:ucsbec:6-98 is not listed on IDEAS
  28. 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.
  29. repec:fth:calaec:6-98 is not listed on IDEAS
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.