Strategic information processing from behavioural data in iterated games
Entropy, ISSN: 1099-4300, Vol: 20, Issue: 1
2018
- 6Citations
- 11Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- CrossRef6
- Captures11
- Readers11
- 11
Article Description
Iterated games are an important framework of economic theory and application, at least since the original work of Axelrod's computational tournaments of the early 80's. Recent theoretical results have shown that games (the economic context) and game theory (the decision-making process) are both formally equivalent to computational logic gates. Here these results are extended to behavioural data obtained from an experiment in which rhesus monkeys sequentially played thousands of the "matching pennies" game, an empirical example similar to Axelrod's tournaments in which algorithms played against one another. The results show that the monkeys exhibit a rich variety of behaviours, both between and within subjects when playing opponents of varying complexity. Despite earlier suggestions, there is no clear evidence that the win-stay, lose-switch strategy is used, however there is evidence of non-linear strategy-based interactions between the predictors of future choices. It is also shown that there is consistent evidence across protocols and across individuals that the monkeys extract non-markovian information, i.e., information from more than just the most recent state of the game. This work shows that the use of information theory in game theory can test important hypotheses that would otherwise be more difficult to extract using traditional statistical methods.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know