2014
DOI: 10.4230/lipics.fsttcs.2014.351
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mixed Nash Equilibria in Concurrent Terminal-Reward Games

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For two-player games, it was erroneously claimed (cf. [3]) first by Chatterjee et al [5] and later again by Ummels and Wojtczak [20] that a simple adaptation of an example of a zero-sum game of Everett resulted in a deterministic reach-a-set game without a Nash equilibrium. Thus it remains an open question whether every deterministic two-player reach-a-set game has a Nash equilibrium.…”
Section: Conclusion and Further Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For two-player games, it was erroneously claimed (cf. [3]) first by Chatterjee et al [5] and later again by Ummels and Wojtczak [20] that a simple adaptation of an example of a zero-sum game of Everett resulted in a deterministic reach-a-set game without a Nash equilibrium. Thus it remains an open question whether every deterministic two-player reach-a-set game has a Nash equilibrium.…”
Section: Conclusion and Further Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand an ε-optimal stationary equilibrium always exists. Do every two-player game where one player has a reachability objective and one player a safety objetive 1 These payoff vectors are (1, 1) and (3,1). It is easy to construct two 4 × 4 bimatrix games with only payoffs from the set {0, 1} in which the unique equlibrium payofff vectors are ( 1 4 , 1 4 ) and ( 3 4 , 1 4 ), respectively, which may replace (1, 1) and (3,1) always have a stationary ε-Nash equilibrium?…”
Section: Conclusion and Further Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Since then, Das et al [12] improved this, by showing undecidability of recursive games with non-negative terminal rewards with just 5 players. In the more general setting of concurrent games, Bouyer et al [7] even showed undecidability of the problem of existence of a NE where a given player is surely winning for deterministic concurrent 3-players games with reachability objectives.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%