= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
bentarm comments on How can we compare decision theories? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (41)
Does this paper have what you're looking for? I'm not in the office, so can't read it at the moment - and might not be able to anyway, as my university's subscriptions tend not to include lots of Science Direct journals - it does at least seem to provide one plausible answer to your question.
(no idea if that link will work - the paper is Bargained-Correlated Equilibria by Tedeschi Piero)
Thanks a lot. RobinZ sent me the paper and I read it. The key part is indeed the definition of the disagreement point, and the reasoning used to justify it is plausible. The only sticky issue is that the disagreement point defined in the paper is unattainable; I'm not sure what to think about that, and not sure whether the disagreement point must be "fair" with respect to the players.
The "common priors" property used in the paper gave me the idea that optimal play can arise via Aumann agreement, which in turn can emerge from individually rational behavior! This is really interesting and I'll have to think about it.
The abstract looks interesting, but I can't access the paper because I'm a regular schmuck in Russia, not a student at a US university or something :-)
I have it. PM me with email address for PDF.
Done!
ETA: and received. Thanks!