Abstract
Hypergames are an emerging tool for combining decision theoretic and game theoretic information. We explain a new approach to the standard two-player zero-sum single-stage normal game that maximizes expected gain while quantifying possible loss. A DTGT agent can use this formulation to select a plan based on its assessment of an opponent's intent, its assessment of an opponent's unpredictability and its utility model of the situation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
P. G. Bennett and M. R. Dando, “Complex strategic analysis: A hypergame study of the fall of France,” J. Operational Research Society, vol. 30, pp. 23–32, 1979.
P. G. Bennett and C. S. Huxham, “Hypergames and what they do: a ‘soft O.R.’ approach,” J. Operational Research Society, vol. 33, pp. 41–50, 1982.
W. Hsu and P. E. Lehner, “Strategic patterns of play in Go,” Transactions on Pattern and Machine Intelligence, vol. 19, pp. 1048–1051, 1997.
J. Nash, “Non-cooperative games,” Annals of Mathematics, vol. 54, pp. 286–295, 1951.
R. R. Vane and P. E. Lehner, “Hypergames and AI in Planning,” Innovative Approaches to Planning, Scheduling and Control: Proc. of a Workshop Held at San Diego, California, November 5-8, 1990, Morgan Kaufmann, 1990.
R. R. Vane, “Using hypergames to select plans in competitive environments,” Ph.D. Dissertation, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, 2000.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vane, R., Lehner, P. Using Hypergames to Increase Planned Payoff and Reduce Risk. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 5, 365–380 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015560508288
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015560508288