rotatingpaguro comments on Game Theory without Argmax [Part 2]

[rotatingpaguro]

• A quantifier $(X\to R)\to P\left(X\right)$

Here you mean $(X\to R)\to P\left(X\right)$, right?

[Cleo Nardo]

Wait I mean a quantifier in $(X\to R)\to P\left(R\right)$.

If we characterise an agent with a quantifier $(X\to R)\to P\left(R\right)$, then we’re saying which payoffs the agent might achieve given each task. Namely, $r\in q\left(u\right)$ if and only if it’s possible that the agent achieves payoff $r\in R$ when faced with a task $u:X\to R$.

But this definition doesn’t play well with a nash equilibria.