
META TOPICPARENT 
name="Errata" 
Chapter 6: Richer Representations: Beyond the Normal and Extensive Forms
 Page number: 162
 Section number: 6.2.3
 Date:11/18/11
 Name:Eugene Vorobeychik
 Email:eug.vorobey@gmail.com
 Content:"there exists an linear programming formulation" => a linear programming formulation
 Page number: 162
 Section number:6.2.3
 Date:11/18/11
 Name:Eugene Vorobeychik
 Email:eug.vorobey@gmail.com
 Content:The first paragraph implies that generalsum singlecontroller stochastic games can be solved in polynomial time. A special case of such games are generalsum finiteaction games, for which no polytime procedure exists. I believe what is meant are zerosum singlecontroller games (I believe Filar and Vrieze (1997) offer a linear programming formulation for this case).
 Page number: 174
 Section number:6.4.1
 Date:04/19/2014
 Name:Haden Hooyeon Lee
 Email:haden[dot]lee[at]stanford[dot]edu
 Content:Definition 6.4.1. "R is a set of r resources" > "R is a set of k resources". This is a minor point, but throughout sections 6.4.16.4.4, "r" is being used for referring to a certain resource in R. Also in comparison, Definition 6.4.7 (for nonatomic version) states "R is a set of k resources".
Similarly, "c = (c_1, \dots, c_r) where c_k ... is a cost function for resource k \in R" should be changed to "c = (c_1, \dots, c_k) where c_r is a cost function for resource r \in R" (also see Definition 6.4.7 for comparison).
 Page number: 175
 Section number:6.4.2
 Date:04/04/2014
 Name:Haden Hooyeon Lee
 Email:haden[dot]lee[at]stanford[dot]edu
 Content:"However, if we run MyopicBestResponse with a = (L, U) ..." => (U, L) just to be consistent with the convention of this book that specifies the row player's action first.
 Page number: 177
 Section number:6.4.3
 Date:04/19/2014
 Name:Haden Hooyeon Lee
 Email:haden[dot]lee[at]stanford[dot]edu
 Content: Proof of Theorem 6.4.6 (Every congestion game is a potential game.).
In the equations of the proof, "c_r(j + 1)" should be changed to "c_r(#(r, a_{i}) + 1)" (this occurs twice). Notice that j appears in the summation and runs from 1 to #(r, (a_{i})).
 Page number: 177
 Section number:6.4.3
 Date:04/19/2014
 Name:Haden Hooyeon Lee
 Email:haden[dot]lee[at]stanford[dot]edu
 Content: In the proof of Theorem 6.4.6, the potential function is defined to be "P(a) = \sum_{r\in R} ..." but it should be negated, i.e. "P(a) =  \sum_{r\in R} ..." because the book earlier defined the utility function to be a negated sum of costs (see the paragraph after Definition 6.4.1). Otherwise, the proof would actually show that "P(a_i, a_{i})  P(a'_i, a_{i}) = ... =  u_i(a_i, a_{i}) + u_i(a'_i, a_{i})" (which is not what we want).
The following errors are fixed in the second printing of the book and online PDF v1.1
 Page number:
 Section number:6.4.3
 Date:7/3/09
 Name:Kevin LeytonBrown
 Content:In the proof of Theorem 6.4.3, "because by construction $u_i(a'_i,a_{i}) > u_(a_i,a_{i})$" should read "because by construction $u_i(a'_i,a_{i}) > u_i(a_i,a_{i})$". (That is, there's a missing subscripted i after the u following the > sign. The left bracket shouldn't be subscripted.)
 Page number: 163 (print version)
 Section number:
 Page (print version): more conceptually complicated => conceptually more complicated
 Date: April 27 2009
 Name:Yoav
 Email:
 Content:
