Talk:Bayesian game

Game theory Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help! Join in \| Fix a red link \| Add content \| Weigh inGame theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Game theoryTemplate:WikiProject Game theorygame theory
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Statistics Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Mathematics Stub‑class Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

example PBE

In the example section, the following text appears: "In fact in the second game there is a perfect Bayesian equilibrium where...". Yet, there is only one game shown in the picture. Should the text be "In fact in the second stage there is a perfect Bayesian equilibrium where..." ?

Not sure what that was about, got rid of "in the second game". Cretog8 (talk) 03:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

citations

The signaling example is based on an 1973 article by spence. here's the citation: Spence, A. M. (1973), 'Job Market Signaling', Quarterly Journal of Economics 87(3), 355--74.

would be nice if someone cared to add this citation to the article text... --1-is-blue (talk) 21:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Types

"(while the word type is used, it is not actually defined in any game theory texts, and may be lost to the ages.)" This is kinda a distraction in the article. "Type" is a standard term for game theory, and so it's fine to use it without qualification. (BTW, it's defined In Myerson's Analysis of Conflict, "The initial private information that a player has at this point in time is called the type of the player." Cretog8 (talk) 00:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's Myerson's Game Theory: Analysis of Conflict.Cretog8 (talk) 00:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The example in "An example" doesn't require PBE

This game can be solved using deletion of dominated strategies and/or Nash equilibria. As such, it doesn't strike me as a very useful example of Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium in action. First, 2 can infer that 1 will never play U because the payoffs from D dominate the payoffs from D. 2 will always play U' because she knows that 1 will never play U (no matter how much 1 wants 2 to play D'). Second, by converting this game to normal form, the game is easily solvable, either by deletion of dominated strategies or by identifying the Nash equilibrium. A more useful example would demonstrate how PBE refines both Bayesian Nash Equilibrium and Nash equilibrium as solution concepts. I wish I could contribute further by thinking of a game that does this, but nothing's coming. Ideas? Abu Casey (talk) 23:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]