2017
DOI: 10.3982/te1647
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling infinitely many agents

Abstract: This paper offers a resolution to an extensively studied question in theoretical economics: which measure spaces are suitable for modeling many economic agents? We propose the condition of "nowhere equivalence" to characterize those measure spaces that can be effectively used to model the space of many agents. In particular, this condition is shown to be more general than various approaches that have been proposed to handle the shortcoming of the Lebesgue unit interval as an agent space. We illustrate the mini… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
32
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
1
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the following theorem, we show that the nowhere equivalence condition is indeed necessary and sufficient for the existence of pure strategy Nash equilibria in large games with any fixed uncountable compact metric space as the action space. The sufficiency part of this theorem is a special case of the corresponding result in Theorem 2 of [13]. The necessity part will be proved in Section 7.…”
Section: Definitionmentioning
confidence: 82%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In the following theorem, we show that the nowhere equivalence condition is indeed necessary and sufficient for the existence of pure strategy Nash equilibria in large games with any fixed uncountable compact metric space as the action space. The sufficiency part of this theorem is a special case of the corresponding result in Theorem 2 of [13]. The necessity part will be proved in Section 7.…”
Section: Definitionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…The relationship that (iv) ⇒ (ii) was proved in Lemma 4.4 of [15]. See Lemmas 2 and 7 in [13] for the complete proof. Lemma 1.…”
Section: Preliminary Lemmasmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 3 more Smart Citations