While I wait, did you see anything in Aumann’s paper that hints at “the policy of planning-optimal-for-the first-move, then action-optimal-thereafter might do better”? Or is that your original research (to use Wikipedia-speak)? It occurs to me that if you’re correct about that, the authors of the paper should have realized it themselves and mentioned it somewhere, since it greatly strengthens their position.
Answering that is a bit tricky. If I am wrong, it is certainly “original research”. But my belief is based upon readings in game theory (including stuff by Aumann) which are not explicitly contained in that paper.
Please bear with me. I have a multi-player example in mind, but I hope to be able to find a single-player one which makes the reasoning clearer.
Regarding your last sentence, I must point out that the whole reason we are having this discussion is my claim to the effect that you don’t really understand their position, and hence cannot judge what does or does not strengthen it.
While I wait, did you see anything in Aumann’s paper that hints at “the policy of planning-optimal-for-the first-move, then action-optimal-thereafter might do better”? Or is that your original research (to use Wikipedia-speak)? It occurs to me that if you’re correct about that, the authors of the paper should have realized it themselves and mentioned it somewhere, since it greatly strengthens their position.
Answering that is a bit tricky. If I am wrong, it is certainly “original research”. But my belief is based upon readings in game theory (including stuff by Aumann) which are not explicitly contained in that paper.
Please bear with me. I have a multi-player example in mind, but I hope to be able to find a single-player one which makes the reasoning clearer.
Regarding your last sentence, I must point out that the whole reason we are having this discussion is my claim to the effect that you don’t really understand their position, and hence cannot judge what does or does not strengthen it.