Difference: AnalyzingGamesErrata (1 vs. 7)

Revision 72017-01-31 - UlleEndriss

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

  • Page number: 12
Line: 19 to 19
 
    • Name:Julian Fogel
    • Email:filos2@yahoo.com
    • Content:Writing $s=(s_i,s_{-i})$ contradicts the definition that $s$ is a member of the Cartesian product $S_1X...XS_n$. The order in a Cartesian product matters, as does nesting. $(s_i,s_{-i})$ is a member of $S_iX(S_1X...S_{i-1}XS_{i+1}X...XS_n)$ which is not the same as $S_1X...XS_n$.This may especially lead to confusion in the case of 2-player games, when $i=2$ since the order of the first and second player gets swapped: $s = (s_i,s_{-i}) = (s_2,s_1)$. But we also have by definition that $s = (s_1,s_2)$.
Added:
>
>
  • Page number: 9
    • Date: 2017-01-31
    • Name: Ulle Endriss
    • Content: "In this section" should be "In this chapter"
 

Revision 62012-03-21 - ErvinVarga

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

Changed:
<
<
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:
>
>
  • Page number: 12
    • Section number: 2.3
    • Date: 03/21/2012
    • Name: Ervin Varga
    • Email: e.varga@ieeeDELETEthisTEXT.org
    • Content: One possible clarification for the expression Uwife(LW)=Uwife(WL) could be the following. Starting from the Definition 1.4.4, the left side of this equality represents the utility function over the strategy profile s, where the action profiles' first element is fixed to LW. In other words, the utility function for s when A= {(LW, LW), (LW, WL)}. The right hand side is for the case when the first element of A is fixed to WL. In both cases, the husband's mixed-strategy has Bernuolli distribution, which similarly applies to the case of a wife's mixed-strategy when the situation is reversed, i.e. Uhusband(LW)=Uhusband(WL) .
 
  • Page number:12
    • Section number:2.3
    • Date:3/13/12

Revision 52012-03-13 - JulianFogel

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

Added:
>
>
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:
  • Page number:12
    • Section number:2.3
    • Date:3/13/12
    • Name:Julian Fogel
    • Email:filos2@yahoo.com
    • Content:The expression $U_{wife}(LW)$ is not precisely defined. The reader is left to guess what it refers to exactly. My guess is that we could define $u_{(i,-j)}$ in a similar fashion as $s_{-j}$, and that $U_{wife}(LW)$ is $u_{(1,-2)}(LW)$.
 
  • Page number:10
    • Section number:2.2
    • Date:3/13/12
    • Name:Julian Fogel
    • Email:filos2@yahoo.com
Changed:
<
<
    • Content:writing $s=(s_i,s_{-i}) contradicts the definition that $s$ is a member of the Cartesian product $S_1X...XS_n$. The order in a Cartesian product matters, as does nesting. $(s_i,s_{-1})$ is a member of S_iX(S_1X...S_{i-1}XS_{i+1}X...XS_n which is not the same as S_1X...XS_n).This may especially lead to confusion in the case of 2-player games, when $i=2$ and the order of the first and second player gets swapped: $s = (s_2,s_1)$.
>
>
    • Content:Writing $s=(s_i,s_{-i})$ contradicts the definition that $s$ is a member of the Cartesian product $S_1X...XS_n$. The order in a Cartesian product matters, as does nesting. $(s_i,s_{-i})$ is a member of $S_iX(S_1X...S_{i-1}XS_{i+1}X...XS_n)$ which is not the same as $S_1X...XS_n$.This may especially lead to confusion in the case of 2-player games, when $i=2$ since the order of the first and second player gets swapped: $s = (s_i,s_{-i}) = (s_2,s_1)$. But we also have by definition that $s = (s_1,s_2)$.
 

Revision 42012-03-13 - JulianFogel

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

Changed:
<
<
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:
>
>
  • Page number:10
    • Section number:2.2
    • Date:3/13/12
    • Name:Julian Fogel
    • Email:filos2@yahoo.com
    • Content:writing $s=(s_i,s_{-i}) contradicts the definition that $s$ is a member of the Cartesian product $S_1X...XS_n$. The order in a Cartesian product matters, as does nesting. $(s_i,s_{-1})$ is a member of S_iX(S_1X...S_{i-1}XS_{i+1}X...XS_n which is not the same as S_1X...XS_n).This may especially lead to confusion in the case of 2-player games, when $i=2$ and the order of the first and second player gets swapped: $s = (s_2,s_1)$.
 

Revision 32009-07-21 - KevinLeytonBrown

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

Deleted:
<
<
  • Page number: 11
    • Section number: 2.2
    • Date: 11/26/08
    • Name: Kevin Leyton-Brown
    • Email: kevinlb@csDELETEthisTEXT.ubc.ca
    • Content: Definitions 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 are each missing a few words. 2.2.3 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a strict Nash equilibrium if ...". Similarly, 2.2.4 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a weak Nash equilibrium if ...".
 
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
Line: 14 to 8
 
    • Email:
    • Content:
Added:
>
>

The following error was fixed in version 1.1:

  • Page number: 11
    • Section number: 2.2
    • Date: 11/26/08
    • Name: Kevin Leyton-Brown
    • Email: kevinlb@csDELETEthisTEXT.ubc.ca
    • Content: Definitions 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 are each missing a few words. 2.2.3 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a strict Nash equilibrium if ...". Similarly, 2.2.4 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a weak Nash equilibrium if ...".
 -- KevinLeytonBrown - 21 Nov 2008

Revision 22008-11-27 - KevinLeytonBrown

Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

Changed:
<
<
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:
>
>
  • Page number: 11
    • Section number: 2.2
    • Date: 11/26/08
    • Name: Kevin Leyton-Brown
    • Email: kevinlb@csDELETEthisTEXT.ubc.ca
    • Content: Definitions 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 are each missing a few words. 2.2.3 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a strict Nash equilibrium if ...". Similarly, 2.2.4 should read "A strategy profile s = (...) is a weak Nash equilibrium if ...".
 
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:

Revision 12008-11-21 - KevinLeytonBrown

Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="Errata"

Chapter 2: Analyzing Games: From Optimality to Equilibrium

  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:
  • Page number:
    • Section number:
    • Date:
    • Name:
    • Email:
    • Content:

-- KevinLeytonBrown - 21 Nov 2008

 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback