5 ms·
Got a reference for this? My understanding is Nash equilibrium exists in any game with finite states, regardless of perfect or imperfect information. The bit
by monkeyjoe 5y ago
Got a reference for this?
My understanding is Nash equilibrium exists in any game with finite states, regardless of perfect or imperfect information.
The bit about announcing your strategy holds by definition - the equilibrium is defined such that no player can improve, thus it doesn't matter if the other player's strategy is known. Also, I don't think there's a requirement that Nash strategies be reachable by iteration.
- hmate9 5y agoEverything you said about Nash equilibrium is true, I didn't mean to imply that it can only be found in perfect information games via iteration. What I wanted to say is that methods for finding it via iteration and self-play exist and are well defined but only for perfect information games. The research itself is here: https://ai.facebook.com/blog/rebel-a-general-game-playing-ai-bot-that-excels-at-poker-and-more/ https://ai.facebook.com/blog/rebel-a-general-game-playing-ai...
- monkeyjoe 5y agoHey just wanted to say thanks for sharing this.
- telxosser 5y agoI believe you could say the minimax strategy to the 2 player game of heads up no limit is solved but beyond that is stretching it. I am way out of it though. I suspect anything more than 2 players is unsolvable when you factor in the stochastic nature of the drunk guy at the table with more than 2 players. Then based on his play he subtracts or adds EV to us randomly. I won't even let myself think past this though with poker because IMO it is a waste of time.