| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 工業與資訊管理學系碩博士班 === 95 === Traditional research of game theory assumes that players are rational, which means they’ll pursue monetary income, and seek for a share exactly as much as their marginal utility. However, this is not reality. It has been proved that traditional game theory sure failed explaining many situations. Under this circumstance, recent research have no other way but to neglect the “rational” idea.
One of the most common influence of rationality is emotion, and it’s so far taken as a hard restriction. For example, if the game requires to be fair, players will judge whether their opponent is having a positive or negative intension toward them and make the response immediately. It seems fine when the game has only one inning, but what about sequential games? Exist research about sequential games, sticking on how to judge their opponents intension toward them, contains too much factors and are all too complicate to be true.
With these drawbacks, this time we decided to analyze fairness in totally different a way. Starting from moral and kindness, we have the players choose how much they care about their opponent instead of reacting to others decision. And because people “endure”, set up a procedure to record their discontent (define as the gap between what they get and what best they may get) and to leave the game or to have their strategies changed were someone becomes really unhappy. Think differently and have the brand new steps, as you can find in the paragraph, our research do analyze fairness well in another way.
|
|---|
