Author Topic: Book Discussion About DB Cooper  (Read 103467 times)

Offline Robert99

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Thanked: 172 times
Re: Book Discussion About DB Cooper
« Reply #495 on: January 17, 2022, 10:06:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Finally?
Don't you read any posts?
I have always said I haven't read his book, other than the preview pages that were available on Amazon.

Let's explore this non-reading by Snowmman some more.

When did evidence first surface of this non-reading? How has this non-reading affected the price of olives in Shenzen?

The evidence of your non-reading was evident in your first post on the book.
 

Offline snowmman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1798
  • Thanked: 166 times
Re: Book Discussion About DB Cooper
« Reply #496 on: January 17, 2022, 10:07:32 PM »
I just finished not reading Edwards' book.

I'm struggling to understand why the notion of "belief revision" is an important concept. In particular, why does the belief over information sets with probability zero matter?

When comparing to the notion of "weak sequential equilibriums" (i.e. an assessment that satisfies sequential rationality and Bayesian updating at reached information sets), since both equilibria satisfy sequential rationality, does this mean that for any profile σW of a weak sequential equilibrium, there exists a profile σP belonging to a perfect Bayesian equilibrium such that σW and σP agree on information sets with positive probability?

Finally, suppose that all information sets have non-zero probability. In this case, is every weak sequential equilibrium also a perfect Bayesian equilibrium?
 
The following users thanked this post: georger

Offline georger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3092
  • Thanked: 449 times
Re: Book Discussion About DB Cooper
« Reply #497 on: January 17, 2022, 11:22:44 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I just finished not reading Edwards' book.

I'm struggling to understand why the notion of "belief revision" is an important concept. In particular, why does the belief over information sets with probability zero matter?

When comparing to the notion of "weak sequential equilibriums" (i.e. an assessment that satisfies sequential rationality and Bayesian updating at reached information sets), since both equilibria satisfy sequential rationality, does this mean that for any profile σW of a weak sequential equilibrium, there exists a profile σP belonging to a perfect Bayesian equilibrium such that σW and σP agree on information sets with positive probability?

Finally, suppose that all information sets have non-zero probability. In this case, is every weak sequential equilibrium also a perfect Bayesian equilibrium?

funny!