An agent with systematically non-standard priors (e.g., lexicographic preferences per Blume, Brandenburger & Dekel 1991) may assign probability zero to certain opponent strategies, making a 'strictly dominated' strategy locally optimal.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
The different ways an opponent could choose to act in a competitive situation.
Priors(as used in probability and epistemology)
Your initial assumptions or beliefs about how likely something is before you consider new evidence (like guessing the probability before looking at the facts).
Probability zero(in probability theory)
Believing something is completely impossible—it will definitely not happen.
agent(Economics terminology applied to medical ethics)
The party in a principal-agent relationship who is instructed to produce the good or service on the principal's behalf — in the medical context, the doctor
strictly dominated strategy(Game theory — strategic form games)
A strategy s_i in S_i is strictly dominated (possibly by a mixed strategy) with respect to a subset X of opponent strategy profiles if and only if there is no probability measure p in the simplex over X such that s_i is a best response with respect to p.