2009
DOI: 10.1007/s00199-009-0440-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Computing a quasi-perfect equilibrium of a two-player game

Abstract: Refining an algorithm due to Koller, Megiddo and von Stengel, we show how to apply Lemke's algorithm for solving linear complementarity programs to compute a quasi-perfect equilibrium in behavior strategies of a given two-player extensive-form game of perfect recall. A quasi-perfect equilibrium is known to be sequential, and our algorithm thus resolves a conjecture of McKelvey and McLennan in the positive. A quasi-perfect equilibrium is also known to be normal-form perfect and our algorithm thus provides an al… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
29
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
(23 reference statements)
0
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The subgame-perfect equilibrium forces the strategy profile to be a Nash equilibrium in each sub-game (i.e., in each sub-tree rooted in some node h) of the original game. Unfortunately, sub-games are not particularly useful in imperfectinformation EFGs; hence, here the refinements include strategic-from perfect equilibrium (Selten, 1975), sequential equilibrium (Kreps & Wilson, 1982), or quasi-perfect equilibrium (van Damme, 1984;Miltersen & Sørensen, 2010). The first refinement avoids using weakly dominated strategies in equilibrium strategies for two-player games (van Damme, 1991, p. 29) and it is also known as the undominated equilibrium.…”
Section: Nash Equilibrium In Extensive-form Gamesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The subgame-perfect equilibrium forces the strategy profile to be a Nash equilibrium in each sub-game (i.e., in each sub-tree rooted in some node h) of the original game. Unfortunately, sub-games are not particularly useful in imperfectinformation EFGs; hence, here the refinements include strategic-from perfect equilibrium (Selten, 1975), sequential equilibrium (Kreps & Wilson, 1982), or quasi-perfect equilibrium (van Damme, 1984;Miltersen & Sørensen, 2010). The first refinement avoids using weakly dominated strategies in equilibrium strategies for two-player games (van Damme, 1991, p. 29) and it is also known as the undominated equilibrium.…”
Section: Nash Equilibrium In Extensive-form Gamesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, we define a class of perturbation schemes for the sequence form such that any limit point of a sequence of Stackelberg equilibria in perturbed games with vanishing perturbation is a quasi-perfect Stackelberg equilibrium. This class of perturbation schemes strictly includes those used to find a quasi-perfect equilibrium by [40]. Then, we extend the algorithm by [16] to the case of quasi-perfect Stackelberg equilibrium computation.…”
Section: Trembling-hand Perfection In Stackelberg Gamesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Watanabe and Yamato [24] used the same concept to study a choice of auction in seller cheating. Miltersen and Sørensen [25] proposed a computational method to find quasiperfect Nash equilibria for two-player games. While the perfectness verification problem is known to be easy with two players [26], to our knowledge, no results are reported on the perfect refinement of Nash equilibria for polymatrix games.…”
Section: Motivation Decision Makers Confronted To Multiplementioning
confidence: 99%