What utility do you get from keeping the promise, and how does it outweigh an extra $1 from bidding $99 (and getting $101) instead of $100?
If you’re invoking Hofstadter’s super-rationality (the idea that your keeping a promise is causally linked to the other person keeping theirs), fine. If you’re acknowledging that you get outside-game utility from being a promise-keeper, also fine (but you’ve got a different payout structure than written). Otherwise, why are you giving up the $1?
And if you are willing to go $99 to get another $1 payout, why isn’t the other player (kind of an inverse super-rationality argument)?
My assumption is that promises are “vague”, playing $99 or $100 both fulfil the promise of giving a high claim close to $100, for which there is no incentive to break.
I think the vagueness stops the race to the bottom in TD, compared to the dollar auction in which every bid can be outmatched by a tiny step without risking going overboard immediately.
I do think I overcomplicated the matter to avoid modifying the payoff matrix.
What utility do you get from keeping the promise, and how does it outweigh an extra $1 from bidding $99 (and getting $101) instead of $100?
If you’re invoking Hofstadter’s super-rationality (the idea that your keeping a promise is causally linked to the other person keeping theirs), fine. If you’re acknowledging that you get outside-game utility from being a promise-keeper, also fine (but you’ve got a different payout structure than written). Otherwise, why are you giving up the $1?
And if you are willing to go $99 to get another $1 payout, why isn’t the other player (kind of an inverse super-rationality argument)?
My assumption is that promises are “vague”, playing $99 or $100 both fulfil the promise of giving a high claim close to $100, for which there is no incentive to break.
I think the vagueness stops the race to the bottom in TD, compared to the dollar auction in which every bid can be outmatched by a tiny step without risking going overboard immediately.
I do think I overcomplicated the matter to avoid modifying the payoff matrix.