Chapter 7: Learning and Teaching
- Page number:
- Section number:
- Date:
- Name:
- Email:
- Content:
- Page number:
- Section number:
- Date:
- Name:
- Email:
- Content:
The following errors are fixed in the second printing of the book and online PDF v1.1
- Page number: 200
- Section number:7.3
- Date: Feb 27, 2010
- Name: Kevin
- Content: changed the notation for other player's strategy and set of strategies for consistency. The paragraph now reads: As in fictitious play, each player begins the game with some prior beliefs. After each round, the player uses Bayesian updating to update these beliefs. Let $S_{-i}^i$ be the set of the opponent's strategies considered possible by player $i$, and $H$ be the set of possible histories of the game. Then we can use Bayes' rule to express the probability assigned by player $i$ to the event in which the opponent is playing a particular strategy $s_{-i}\in S_{-i}^i$ given the observation of history $h\in H$, as \[P_i (s_{-i} | h) = \frac{P_i (h | s_{-i}) P_i (s_{-i})}{\sum_{s_{-i}' \in S_{-i}^i} P_i (h | s_{-i}') P_i (s_{-i}') }.\]
- Page number: 204
- Section number: 7.4
- Date: Feb 27, 2010
- Name: Kevin
- Content: Added footnote: "For consistency with the literature on reinforcement learning, in this section we use the notation $s$ and $S$ for a state and set of states respectively, rather than for a strategy profile and set of strategy profiles as elsewhere in the book."
- Page number: 211
- Section number: 7.6
- Date: Feb 27, 2010
- Name: Kevin
- Content: Renamed the set of target opponent strategies from $S$ to $\tilde{S}$ for consistency with the rest of the book, in which $S$ denotes the set of all strategy profiles.
- Page number: 213-218
- Section number: 7.7
- Date:Feb 27, 2010
- Name: Nicolas Lambert
- Content: All instances of S should be replaced by s for consistency with the rest of the book.
- Page number: 215
- Section number:7.7.1
- Date:10.28.09
- Name:Yoav
- Email:
- Content:Defs 7.7.3 and 7.7.4 (stable steady state and asymp stable state) are missing "for sufficiently small $\epsilon$..."
-- KevinLeytonBrown - 13 Nov 2008