2022 IEEE 61st Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) 2022
DOI: 10.1109/cdc51059.2022.9993306
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pseudo-Gradient Dynamics with Cognitive Predictions in Noncooperative Dynamical Systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To deal with the uncertainties in the private information of the agents, we investigate stability conditions for a Nash equilibrium for arbitrary sensitivity parameters, arbitrary cognitive levels of the agents, and arbitrary knowledge network of the payoff functions. Different from preliminary version [32], this paper generalizes the results to the case where the agents are allowed to adopt Level-k thinking with k > 3. In addition, we present the applications of the results in homogeneous and differentiated oligopoly markets.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To deal with the uncertainties in the private information of the agents, we investigate stability conditions for a Nash equilibrium for arbitrary sensitivity parameters, arbitrary cognitive levels of the agents, and arbitrary knowledge network of the payoff functions. Different from preliminary version [32], this paper generalizes the results to the case where the agents are allowed to adopt Level-k thinking with k > 3. In addition, we present the applications of the results in homogeneous and differentiated oligopoly markets.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…Except for this manner, it is possible to use other types of recursive reasoning such as [31] for characterizing proactive decision-making with Level-k thinking in noncooperative system if the agents are hesitating in how much proactive they should be. APPENDIX 1) Derivation of (31), (32): The derivation of ( 31) is a direct consequence of ( 17), (19) along with…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%