About: Quantal response equilibrium is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 319 publications have been published within this topic receiving 11283 citations.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate the use of standard statistical models for quantal choice in a game theoretic setting and define a quantal response equilibrium (ORE) as a fixed point of this process and establish existence.
TL;DR: The Cognitive Hierarchy (CH) model as discussed by the authors assumes that each player assumes that his strategy is the most sophisticated, and assumes that other players are distributed over step 0 through step k − 1, and explains why equilibrium theory predicts behavior well in some games and poorly in others.
Abstract: Players in a game are “in equilibrium” if they are rational, and accurately predict other players' strategies. In many experiments, however, players are not in equilibrium. An alternative is “cognitive hierarchy” (CH) theory, where each player assumes that his strategy is the most sophisticated. The CH model has inductively defined strategic categories: step 0 players randomize; and step k thinkers best-respond, assuming that other players are distributed over step 0 through step k − 1. This model fits empirical data, and explains why equilibrium theory predicts behavior well in some games and poorly in others. An average of 1.5 steps fits data from many games.
TL;DR: In this article, an agent quantal response equilibrium (AQRE) is proposed for quantal choice in extensive form games, where players make choices based on a quantal-choice model and assume other players do so as well.
Abstract: This article investigates the use of standard econometric models for quantal choice to study equilibria of extensive form games. Players make choices based on a quantal-choice model and assume other players do so as well. We define an agent quantal response equilibrium (AQRE), which applies QRE to the agent normal form of an extensive form game and imposes a statistical version of sequential rationality. We also define a parametric specification, called logit-AQRE, in which quantal-choice probabilities are given by logit response functions. AQRE makes predictions that contradict the invariance principle in systematic ways. We show that these predictions match up with some experimental findings by Schotter et al. (1994) about the play of games that differ only with respect to inessential transformations of the extensive form. The logit-AQRE also implies a unique selection from the set of sequential equilibria in generic extensive form games. We examine data from signaling game experiments by Banks et al. (1994) and Brandts and Holt (1993). We find that the logit-AQRE selection applied to these games succeeds in predicting patterns of behavior observed in these experiments, even when our prediction conflicts with more standard equilibrium refinements, such as the intuitive criterion. We also reexamine data from the McKelvey and Palfrey (1992) centipede experiment and find that the AQRE model can account for behavior that had previously been explained in terms of altruistic behavior.
TL;DR: The experimental results strongly support the basic insight of the theory, namely, that less information is transmitted when preferences of the sender and the receiver diverge, and the average payoffs are very close to those predicted by the most informative equilibrium.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors report the results of a private-values auction experiment in which expected costs of deviating from the Nash equilibrium bidding function are asymmetric, with the implication that upward deviations will be more likely in one treatment than in the other.