Common Belief in Choquet Rationality and Ambiguity Attitudes – Extended Abstract

07/22/2019
by   Adam Dominiak, et al.
0

We consider finite games in strategic form with Choquet expected utility. Using the notion of (unambiguously) believed, we define Choquet rationalizability and characterize it by Choquet rationality and common beliefs in Choquet rationality in the universal capacity type space in a purely measurable setting. We also show that Choquet rationalizability is equivalent to iterative elimination of strictly dominated actions (not in the original game but) in an extended game. This allows for computation of Choquet rationalizable actions without the need to first compute Choquet integrals. Choquet expected utility allows us to investigate common belief in ambiguity love/aversion. We show that ambiguity love/aversion leads to smaller/larger Choquet rationalizable sets of action profiles.

READ FULL TEXT

page 1

page 2

page 3

page 4

research
06/22/2021

Are the Players in an Interactive Belief Model Meta-certain of the Model Itself?

In an interactive belief model, are the players "commonly meta-certain" ...
research
03/04/2012

Ambiguous Language and Differences in Beliefs

Standard models of multi-agent modal logic do not capture the fact that ...
research
03/04/2016

Analyzing Games with Ambiguous Player Types using the MINthenMAX Decision Model

In many common interactive scenarios, participants lack information abou...
research
11/30/2018

Automated Tactical Decision Planning Model with Strategic Values Guidance for Local Action-Value-Ambiguity

In many real-world planning problems, action's impact differs with a pla...
research
03/06/2013

Qualitative Measures of Ambiguity

This paper introduces a qualitative measure of ambiguity and analyses it...
research
07/27/2017

Rationalizability and Epistemic Priority Orderings

At the beginning of a dynamic game, players may have exogenous theories ...
research
09/29/2021

Gaps, Ambiguity, and Establishing Complexity-Class Containments via Iterative Constant-Setting

Cai and Hemachandra used iterative constant-setting to prove that Few ⊆ ...

Please sign up or login with your details

Forgot password? Click here to reset