What I want to do is I want to draw a picture, a little bit like we did for the partnership game.
下面我来画出函数图像,这与合伙人博弈的有点像
Now, in fact, that's as far as we can get with dominance arguments in this particular game, but nevertheless, let's just stick with it a second.
目前为止,这些就是我们通过,此博弈得到的全部与优势有关信息了,然而,我们来再深究一下
Now, a lot of today is going to be fairly abstract, so I just want to remind you that Game Theory has some real world relevance.
今天所讲的很多内容会很抽象,但我想要提醒大家,博弈论与现实世界是紧密联系的
What is it that's different about this game from the... What's the obvious thing just looking at this picture that makes it different from the partnership game.
这个博弈的不同之处在于,从这个图上能很明显看到的,它与确实与合伙人博弈有所区别
Notice this game is not symmetric in the payoffs or in the strategies.
但注意此博弈的策略与收益是非对称的
It's different from the partnership game, it's different from the investment game.
它与合伙人博弈不同,与投资博弈也不同
The main textbook is this one, Dutta's book Strategy and Games.
主要是这本,杜塔的《策略与博弈》
It's different from the partnership game.
它与合伙人博弈就不一样
We've seen a case where an evil git was playing an evil git; where an indignant angel was playing an indignant angel; and we've seen both the flips of those: the evil git versus the indignant angel; and the indignant angel against the evil git.
一种是饭桶恶魔于与饭桶恶魔的博弈,一种是愤怒天使和愤怒天使的博弈,还有两种是相反的博弈,自私鬼博弈愤怒天使,和愤怒天使博弈自私鬼
Because at this point, as in the partnership game, which there was a similar thing, as in the partnership game where the best responses intersect is where Player 1 is playing a best response to Player 2, and Player 2 is playing a best response to Player 1.
因为这一点,与合伙人博弈的情况一样,两者的情况是很类似的,合伙人博弈中最佳对策曲线的交点处,参与人1采用了回应参与人2的最佳对策,参与人2采用了回应参与人1的最佳对策
应用推荐