Aumann agreement is a result of two rationalists sharing all information and ideally updating.
No, this is not the case. All they need is a common prior and common knowledge of their probabilities. The whole reason Aumann agreement is clever is because you’re not sharing the evidence that convinced you.
No, this is not the case. All they need is a common prior and common knowledge of their probabilities. The whole reason Aumann agreement is clever is because you’re not sharing the evidence that convinced you.
See, for example, the original paper.
Updated. (My brain, I didn’t edit the comment.)