Abstract:In settings of incomplete information we put forward an epistemic framework for designing mechanisms that successfully leverage the players’ arbitrary higher-order beliefs, even when such beliefs are totally wrong, and even when the players are rational in a very weak sense. Following Aumann [5], we consider a player i rational if he uses a pure strategy si such that no alternative pure strategy si performs better than si in every world i considers possible, and consider him order-k rational if he is rational and believes that all other players are order-(k − 1) rational. We then introduce an iterative deletion procedure of dominated strategies and use it to precisely characterize the strategies consistent with the players being order-k rational. We exemplify the power of our framework in single-good auctions by introducing and achieving a new class of revenue benchmarks, defined over the players’ arbitrary beliefs, that can be much higher than classical ones, and are unattainable by traditional mechanisms. Namely, we exhibit a mechanism that, for every k ≥ 0 and e > 0 and whenever the players are order-(k+1) rational, guarantees revenue ≥ Gk−e, where Gk is the second highest belief about belief about . . . (k times) about the highest valuation of some player, even when such a player’s identity is not precisely known. Importantly, our mechanism is possibilistic interim individually rational. Essentially this means that, based on his beliefs, a player’s utility is non-negative not in expectation, but in each world he believes possible. We finally show that our benchmark Gk is so demanding that it separates the revenue achievable with order-k rational players from that achievable with order-(k+1) rational ones. That is, no possibilistic interim individually rational mechanism can guarantee revenue ≥ Gk − c, for any constant c > 0, when the players are only order-k rational.

Forcing Iterated Admissibility in Strategic Belief Models

Iterated Admissibility does not refine Extensive-Form Rationalizability

Epistemic Implementation and the Arbitrary-Belief Auction

Rationalizing Irrational Beliefs

A Theory of Bounded Inductive Rationality

The Robustness of Extensive-Form Rationalizability

Knowledge, Belief and Counterfactual Reasoning in Games

Tight Revenue Bounds with Possibilistic Beliefs and Level-k Rationality

Forcing over choiceless models and generic absoluteness

Erratum: "rational dynamics and epistemic logic in games"

A general theory of iterated forcing using finitely additive measures

Alternating (In)Dependence-Friendly Logic

Rational Dynamics And Epistemic Logic In Games (Vol 9, Pg 13, 2007)

Revealed Information

On Admissible Strategies in Robust Utility Maximization

Incomplete Rationality Vs. Incomplete Strategy in Minority Game Model

Better Outcomes from More Rationality.

Probabilistic Model Checking for Strategic Equilibria-based Decision Making: Advances and Challenges

The Complexity of Admissibility in Omega-Regular Games

Rational Dynamics and Epistemic Logic in Games