Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
game_theory [2023/02/10 14:28] – [Tragedy of The Commons] tom | game_theory [2024/04/12 09:41] (current) – [The Prisoner's Dilemma] tom | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | {{tag> | ||
======Game Theory====== | ======Game Theory====== | ||
- | The [[iemt_wiki|IEMT]] model is developed around the model of Zero-Sum Game Theory, particularly with regard to the Five Patterns of Chronicity. Game theory[(Game_theory> | + | The [[iemt_wiki|IEMT]] model is developed around the model of Zero-Sum Game Theory, particularly with regard to the [[iemt# |
- | is a mathematical framework for modelling and analysing situations in which decision-makers interact to maximise their own interests. It is used to study decision-making in various fields, such as economics, political science, psychology, and biology. The theory considers the strategic interdependence between players and provides methods for predicting and explaining the outcome of interactions in different types of games, such as cooperative and non-cooperative games. Some of the key concepts in game theory include Nash equilibrium, | + | |
====Nash Equilibrium==== | ====Nash Equilibrium==== | ||
- | The Nash Equilibrium[(Nash_equilibrium> | + | The Nash Equilibrium[(Nash_equilibrium> |
Formally, a Nash Equilibrium is a set of strategies, one for each player, such that no player has an incentive to deviate from their strategy given the strategies of the other players. This means that if all players follow their Nash Equilibrium strategies, the outcome is stable and cannot be improved upon by any single player changing their strategy. | Formally, a Nash Equilibrium is a set of strategies, one for each player, such that no player has an incentive to deviate from their strategy given the strategies of the other players. This means that if all players follow their Nash Equilibrium strategies, the outcome is stable and cannot be improved upon by any single player changing their strategy. | ||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
In real-world situations, Nash Equilibria may not always reflect the socially optimal outcome, as the individual incentives may not align with the social good. In such cases, alternative solution concepts, such as the Pareto efficiency or the Correlated Equilibrium, | In real-world situations, Nash Equilibria may not always reflect the socially optimal outcome, as the individual incentives may not align with the social good. In such cases, alternative solution concepts, such as the Pareto efficiency or the Correlated Equilibrium, | ||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP CENTER 50%> | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | </ | ||
====The Pareto Efficiency==== | ====The Pareto Efficiency==== | ||
- | The Pareto Efficiency[(Pareto_efficiency> | + | The Pareto Efficiency[(Pareto_efficiency> |
- | , named after economist Vilfredo Pareto, is a concept in economics that describes a situation in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making another individual worse off. In other words, a Pareto efficient outcome is one in which no further improvement can be made without making at least one person worse off. Vilfredo Pareto (1848–1923) was an Italian engineer, sociologist, | + | |
The concept of Pareto Efficiency is used to assess the efficiency of economic systems and is often used as a benchmark for determining whether a proposed change will lead to a more efficient outcome. A change that makes one person better off and no one worse off is considered to be a Pareto improvement, | The concept of Pareto Efficiency is used to assess the efficiency of economic systems and is often used as a benchmark for determining whether a proposed change will lead to a more efficient outcome. A change that makes one person better off and no one worse off is considered to be a Pareto improvement, | ||
Line 28: | Line 31: | ||
====Correlated Equilibrium==== | ====Correlated Equilibrium==== | ||
- | Correlated Equilibrium[(Correlated_equilibrium> | + | Correlated Equilibrium[(Correlated_equilibrium> |
- | is a solution concept in game theory that extends the Nash Equilibrium by allowing for randomization or correlation in the strategies of the players. In a Correlated Equilibrium, | + | |
The concept of Correlated Equilibrium allows for the possibility of coordination and cooperation between players, as their strategies can be correlated in a way that benefits all players. This makes Correlated Equilibrium a more realistic solution concept in situations where coordination and cooperation are important. | The concept of Correlated Equilibrium allows for the possibility of coordination and cooperation between players, as their strategies can be correlated in a way that benefits all players. This makes Correlated Equilibrium a more realistic solution concept in situations where coordination and cooperation are important. | ||
Line 39: | Line 41: | ||
====Rawlsian Fairness Criterion==== | ====Rawlsian Fairness Criterion==== | ||
- | The Rawlsian[(Justice_as_Fairness> | + | The Rawlsian[(Justice_as_Fairness> |
- | fairness criterion is a solution concept in social and political philosophy that is named after philosopher John Rawls. The Rawlsian fairness criterion is used to evaluate the fairness of a particular outcome or distribution of resources in a society. John Rawls (1921–2002) was an American philosopher and political economist. He is widely regarded as one of the most important political philosophers of the 20th century and is best known for his theory of justice as fairness, which is presented in his seminal work "A Theory of Justice." | + | |
The Rawlsian fairness criterion is based on two principles of justice: the first, the principle of equal basic liberties, states that everyone is entitled to a set of basic liberties and rights that cannot be taken away; the second, | The Rawlsian fairness criterion is based on two principles of justice: the first, the principle of equal basic liberties, states that everyone is entitled to a set of basic liberties and rights that cannot be taken away; the second, | ||
Line 51: | Line 52: | ||
=====Zero-Sum Game Theory===== | =====Zero-Sum Game Theory===== | ||
+ | <WRAP 300 RIGHT> | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | </ | ||
Zero-sum game[(Zero-sum_game> | Zero-sum game[(Zero-sum_game> | ||
- | | + | |
Examples of zero-sum games include chess, poker, and rock-paper-scissors. In these games, one player' | Examples of zero-sum games include chess, poker, and rock-paper-scissors. In these games, one player' | ||
In contrast, non-zero-sum games, such as many real-world economic and political interactions, | In contrast, non-zero-sum games, such as many real-world economic and political interactions, | ||
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | The more participants viewed social hierarchies as zero-sum, the more they were willing to use dominance tactics...zero-sum beliefs about hierarchies increase the preference for dominance-oriented, | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | </ | ||
In zero-sum games, the concept of the Nash Equilibrium is often used to analyze and predict the outcome of the game. The Nash Equilibrium is a state in which each player' | In zero-sum games, the concept of the Nash Equilibrium is often used to analyze and predict the outcome of the game. The Nash Equilibrium is a state in which each player' | ||
Line 90: | Line 99: | ||
The prisoner' | The prisoner' | ||
+ | <WRAP CENTER 50%> | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | \\ | ||
+ | <WRAP CENTER 50%> | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | </ | ||
=====Other Common Examples of Game Theory===== | =====Other Common Examples of Game Theory===== | ||
Line 105: | Line 122: | ||
These games illustrate different aspects of game theory and decision-making and are used to study various aspects of human behavior, including cooperation, | These games illustrate different aspects of game theory and decision-making and are used to study various aspects of human behavior, including cooperation, | ||
+ | |||
+ | A Game Theory course from Stanford University is available for free by Stanford Online [[https:// | ||
=====Tragedy of The Commons===== | =====Tragedy of The Commons===== | ||
The Tragedy of the Commons[(Tragedy_of_the_commons)] is a concept in game theory that describes a situation in which multiple individuals share a common resource, such as a fishery or a forest, and must decide how much of the resource to extract. In this game, each individual acts in their own self-interest and tries to maximize their extraction of the resource. However, if all individuals extract as much as they can, the resource becomes depleted and everyone is worse off. | The Tragedy of the Commons[(Tragedy_of_the_commons)] is a concept in game theory that describes a situation in which multiple individuals share a common resource, such as a fishery or a forest, and must decide how much of the resource to extract. In this game, each individual acts in their own self-interest and tries to maximize their extraction of the resource. However, if all individuals extract as much as they can, the resource becomes depleted and everyone is worse off. | ||
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP CENTER 50%> | ||
+ | {{youtube> | ||
+ | </ | ||
The Tragedy of the Commons is often referred to as a " | The Tragedy of the Commons is often referred to as a " | ||
Line 127: | Line 150: | ||
====Tragedy of The Commons and Narcisissm==== | ====Tragedy of The Commons and Narcisissm==== | ||
- | The relationship between narcissism and the Tragedy of the Commons game theory can be seen in the sense that individuals with narcissistic tendencies may prioritise their own needs and desires and act in their own self-interest at the expense of the group or relationship as a whole. This behaviour can be seen as a form of " | + | The relationship between narcissism and the Tragedy of the Commons game theory[(0146167205274855> |
+ | can be seen in the sense that individuals with narcissistic tendencies may prioritise their own needs and desires and act in their own self-interest at the expense of the group or relationship as a whole. This behaviour can be seen as a form of " | ||
In situations where a narcissistic individual is part of a group or relationship, | In situations where a narcissistic individual is part of a group or relationship, | ||
Line 136: | Line 160: | ||
+ |