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.

Implementation with Uncertain Evidence

Robust Implementation with Costly Information

Epistemic Implementation and the Arbitrary-Belief Auction

K-Implementation

Perfect robust implementation by private information design

Implementation without commitment in moral hazard environments

Mechanism Design with Possibilistic Beliefs.

Implementations of Cooperative Games Under Non-Cooperative Solution Concepts

Compromise, Don't Optimize: Generalizing Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium to Allow for Ambiguity

Procuring Unverifiable Information

Algorithmic Persuasion with Evidence

Mechanisms for a No-Regret Agent: Beyond the Common Prior

Getting More by Knowing Less: Bayesian Incentive Compatible Mechanisms for Fair Division

A systematic process for evaluating structured perfect Bayesian equilibria in dynamic games with asymmetric information

Implementation via Information Design in Binary‐Action Supermodular Games

Deception in Nash Equilibrium Seeking

Implementability of Honest Multi-Agent Sequential Decision-Making with Dynamic Population

Implementing Evidence Acquisition: Time Dependence in Contracts for Advice

Perfect and General Virtual Implementation For Perfectly Informed Players

Mechanism Design with Set-Theoretic Beliefs

Commitment with Signaling under Double-sided Information Asymmetry