The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Games with Incomplete Information Played by “Bayesian” Players, I–III Part I. The Basic Model
Abstract
The paper develops a new theory for the analysis of games with incomplete information where the players are uncertain about some important parameters of the game situation, such as the payoff functions, the strategies available to various players, the information other players have about the game, etc. However, each player has a subjective probability distribution over the alternative possibilities. In most of the paper it is assumed that these probability distributions entertained by the different players are mutually “consistent”, in the sense that they can be regarded as conditional probability distributions derived from a certain “basic probability distribution” over the parameters unknown to the various players. But later the theory is extended also to cases where the different players' subjective probability distributions fail to satisfy this consistency assumption. In cases where the consistency assumption holds, the original game can be replaced by a game where nature first conducts a lottery in accordance with the basic probability distribution, and the outcome of this lottery will decide which particular subgame will be played, i.e., what the actual values of the relevant parameters will be in the game. Yet, each player will receive only partial information about the outcome of the lottery, and about the values of these parameters. However, every player will know the “basic probability distribution” governing the lottery. Thus, technically, the resulting game will be a game with complete information. It is called the Bayes-equivalent of the original game. Part I of the paper describes the basic model and discusses various intuitive interpretations for the latter. Part II shows that the Nash equilibrium points of the Bayes-equivalent game yield “Bayesian equilibrium points” for the original game. Finally, Part III considers the main properties of the “basic probability distribution”.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Subjectivity and Correlation in Randomized Strategies
Aumann, R. J. (1974) · Journal of Mathematical Economics · doi:10.1016/0304-4068(74)90037-8 · Cited by 1,630
Crawford, S. E. S., & Ostrom, E. (1995) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2082975 · Cited by 1,362
Barth, S., & de Jong, M. D. T. (2017) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013 · Cited by 798
Autonomous agents modelling other agents: A comprehensive survey and open problems
Albrecht, S. V., & Stone, P. (2018) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2018.01.002 · Cited by 417
Institutions and the Free Rider: The Assurance Problem in Collective Action
Runge, C. F. (1984) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.2307/2130438 · Cited by 290
Metadata
- Authors
- Harsanyi, J. C.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1967-11
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 159-182
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W4250744658
- Cited by
- 2,147
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Games with Incomplete Information Played by “Bayesian” Players, I–III Part I. The Basic Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.14.3.159
- The paper
- Harsanyi, J. C. (1967). Games with Incomplete Information Played by “Bayesian” Players, I–III Part I. The Basic Model. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.14.3.159
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.