Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Bernheim (1984) and Pearce (1984) showed that rationaliza... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The trivial converse — that any strategy profile surviving IESDS is consistent with common knowledge of rationality — is not particularly interesting.

    Bernheim (1984) and Pearce (1984) showed that rationalizable strategies—not just Nash equilibria—are the proper solution concept under CKR, making the boundary IESDS draws theoretically load-bearing.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Bernheim (1984) and Pearce (1984)(as cited research establishing a key concept in game theory)
    These are references to two economists who published research in 1984 showing how people make decisions when everyone involved knows what everyone else knows. Their work became foundational for understanding strategic thinking.
    CKR(as used in game theory)
    An abbreviation for 'Common Knowledge of Rationality'—the assumption that all players in a game are rational and everyone knows this fact about everyone else.
    IESDS(as a game theory process)
    Iterated Elimination of Dominated Strategies—a method of solving games by repeatedly removing choices that are clearly bad no matter what others do.
    Load-bearing (theoretically)(as describing the significance of the boundary IESDS draws)
    A concept is 'load-bearing' if it actually does important work in supporting a theory or argument—if it matters and isn't just extra decoration.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    Nash equilibria(as an alternative solution concept being compared)
    A situation in a strategic game where each player has chosen their best move given what everyone else is doing, so no player wants to change their choice. It's named after mathematician John Nash.
    Rationalizable strategies(as a solution concept in game theory)
    In a game or decision-making situation, a strategy is 'rationalizable' if it's something a reasonable player might do based on what they believe other players will do—even if it's not the absolute best move.
    solution concept(Game theory)
    A characterization of how a strategic game is 'solved'; Nash equilibrium is sometimes called a solution concept because it identifies the steady states of strategic interaction

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedModality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    The trivial converse — that any strategy profile surviving IESDS is consistent w...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective