Communication, correlated equilibria and incentive compatibility

Publisher Summary In principle, anything that a player can do to communicate and coordinate with other players could be described by moves in an extensive-form game, so that planning these communication moves would become part of the player's strategy choice itself. Adding a communication system does not eliminate any of the equilibria of the original game because there are always equilibria of the communication game in which reports and messages are treated as having no meaning and hence are ignored by all players. Such equilibria of the communication game are called “babbling equilibria.” The set of correlated equilibria of a strategic-form game Г has a simple and tractable mathematical structure because it is closed by convex and is characterized by a finite system of linear inequalities. The revelation principle for strategic-form games asserted that any equilibrium of any communication system can be simulated by a communication system in which the only communication is from a central mediator to the players, without any communication from the players to the mediator. The one-way nature of this communication is not surprising, because the players have no private information to tell the mediator about, within the structure of the strategic-form game. However, players in a Bayesian game may have private information about their types, and two-way communication would then allow the players' actions to depend on each other's types as well as on extraneous random variables, such as coin tosses. Thus, in Bayesian games with communication, there may be a need for players to talk as well as to listen in mediated communication systems.

[1]  E. Maskin,et al.  The Principal-Agent Relationship with an Informed Principal: The Case of Private Values , 1990 .

[2]  K. McCardle,et al.  Coherent behavior in noncooperative games , 1990 .

[3]  Françoise Forges,et al.  Non-Zero Sum Repeated Games and Information Transmission , 1994, Essays in Game Theory.

[4]  F. Forges Published by: The , 2022 .

[5]  Imre Bárány,et al.  Fair Distribution Protocols or How the Players Replace Fortune , 1992, Math. Oper. Res..

[6]  R. Myerson Optimal coordination mechanisms in generalized principal–agent problems , 1982 .

[7]  Joseph Farrell Meaning and Credibility in Cheap-Talk Games , 1993 .

[8]  Roger B. Myerson,et al.  Acceptable and predominant correlated equilibria , 1986 .

[9]  R. Aumann Correlated Equilibrium as an Expression of Bayesian Rationality Author ( s ) , 1987 .

[10]  R. Aumann Subjectivity and Correlation in Randomized Strategies , 1974 .

[11]  J. Harsanyi Games with Incomplete Information Played by 'Bayesian' Players, Part III. The Basic Probability Distribution of the Game , 1968 .

[12]  J. Vial,et al.  Strategically zero-sum games: The class of games whose completely mixed equilibria cannot be improved upon , 1978 .

[13]  R. Myerson Mechanism Design by an Informed Principal , 1983 .

[14]  Sergiu Hart,et al.  Existence of Correlated Equilibria , 1989, Math. Oper. Res..

[15]  J. Sobel,et al.  STRATEGIC INFORMATION TRANSMISSION , 1982 .

[16]  J. Neumann,et al.  Theory of games and economic behavior , 1945, 100 Years of Math Milestones.

[17]  J. Harsanyi Games with Incomplete Information Played by “Bayesian” Players Part II. Bayesian Equilibrium Points , 1968 .

[18]  Roger B. Myerson,et al.  Credible negotiation statements and coherent plans , 1989 .

[19]  F. Forges,et al.  Correlated equilibria in a class of repeated games with incomplete information , 1985 .

[20]  Sanford J. Grossman,et al.  Perfect sequential equilibrium , 1986 .

[21]  R. Myerson MULTISTAGE GAMES WITH COMMUNICATION , 1984 .

[22]  R. Selten Reexamination of the perfectness concept for equilibrium points in extensive games , 1975, Classics in Game Theory.