11–20 of 31 posts
A separate example of very advanced strategies in the simplest game: Rock Paper Scissors Programming Competition http://www.rpscontest.com Personally I think it is somehow ahead of these academic researches in some sense.
Good old rock, nothing beats rock. Doh!
Huh? That isn't correct is it? Snitching is best because it gives the highest payout regardless of what the other person does (snitching strictly dominates not snitching).
If the other does not snitch and you do, you go free. If the other person does snitch, you should as well, because it gives you 3 months instead of 6.
http://www.academicearth.org/courses/game-theory/ (you don't need an account)
This is roughly the 5th article on a "Revolution in Game Theory" that I've seen and not a single one of them has successfully described what the so called revolutionary strategy is. Here is a direct link to a PDF of a paper defining the Zero Determinant Strategy. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.2666v1.pdf I don't really understand it. Neither do journalists it seems. Can someone explain?
For example, you might say that you will cooperate with prob 75% if I cooperated, or 25% otherwise.
By choosing the probabilities carefully this can turn the game into one where the more I choose to cooperate, then the better I do - but you will always outperform me (unless I choose to always defect when we both end up equally lost).
Feels similar to only proposing win-lose business deals. You will never "lose" but will soon run out of people willing to deal.
In a single game, the proposition of the dilemma still holds true. The best solution is if both don't talk.
In an iterative game, then things change.. but that's pretty obvious. So not sure what is so revoluationary about this paper.
" Nevertheless, in a single game, the best strategy is to snitch because it guarantees that you don't get the maximum jail term. " Huh? That isn't correct is it? Snitching is best because it gives the highest payout regardless of what the other person does (snitching strictly dominates not snitching). If the other does not snitch and you do, you go free. If the other person does snitch, you should as well, because it…
This is roughly the 5th article on a "Revolution in Game Theory" that I've seen and not a single one of them has successfully described what the so called revolutionary strategy is. Here is a direct link to a PDF of a paper defining the Zero Determinant Strategy. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.2666v1.pdf I don't really understand it. Neither do journalists it seems. Can someone explain?
Actually, the original paper is this one: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/16/1206569109.full... Here is an description of the result and its implications http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2012/07/zerodeterminant_...
Maybe that's not such a good test after all.
This is roughly the 5th article on a "Revolution in Game Theory" that I've seen and not a single one of them has successfully described what the so called revolutionary strategy is. Here is a direct link to a PDF of a paper defining the Zero Determinant Strategy. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1208.2666v1.pdf I don't really understand it. Neither do journalists it seems. Can someone explain?
Actually, the original paper is this one: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/05/16/1206569109.full... Here is an description of the result and its implications http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2012/07/zerodeterminant_...