What’s the gist? I’m very dubious anyone models at more than 1 level in 90% of cases outside of puzzles about perfect logicians with marks on their foreheads
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
apropos of that thread on Hans Witsenhausen (it’s a travesty that Aumann is practically a household name among the students of strategy and conflict, but not Witsenhausen)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mraginsky @Aelkus
Yeah, Witsenhausen notion of information state is the right lens on this. More levels of recursive analysis does not mean more primitive random information.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
this looks really interesting — good source to read about it?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I have paper copies of a couple of his unpublished notes from a course in grad school... but this might give you a taste of what he's about. It's a fairly abstruse/t/technical field (decentralized stochastic control) https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~pgrover/files/EncyclopediaWitsenhausen.pdf …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr @kylemathews and
Basically, he is known for exploring the question of "who knows what, when?" in distributed systems, and coming up with a clever counter-example showing some fundamental difficulties. The tldr of his contribution is "follow the primitive information" (like "follow the money")
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
His most insightful (and most abstruse) paper is on distributed situations where the game tree is not definable a priori, but evolves dynamically during play: given who knows what/when and what they can do with it, how can we know there are no deadlocks or race conditions.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @mraginsky @vgr and1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Yep, that one is in my files as well.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.