Skip to main content

Learning Backward Induction: A Neural Network Agent Approach

  • Conference paper
Agent-Based Approaches in Economic and Social Complex Systems VI

Part of the book series: Agent-Based Social Systems ((ABSS,volume 8))

Abstract

This paper addresses the question of whether neural networks (NNs), a realistic cognitive model of human information processing, can learn to backward induce in a two-stage game with a unique subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium. The NNs were found to predict the Nash equilibrium approximately 70% of the time in new games. Similarly to humans, the neural network agents are also found to suffer from subgame and truncation inconsistency, supporting the contention that they are appropriate models of general learning in humans. The agents were found to behave in a bounded rational manner as a result of the endogenous emergence of decision heuristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    They show that even the simplest NN, a single perceptron, is capable of implementing trigger strategies in a repeated prisoner’s dilemma game and of supporting all subgame perfect payoffs. They also prove that only a slightly more complicated network is capable of supporting all equilibrium payoffs in a general 2 ×2 game.

  2. 2.

    The Nash equilibrium is the set of strategies for which neither player has an incentive to unilaterally change strategy.

  3. 3.

    For simplicity, the network presented has only one hidden layer however some of the NNs in this paper will employ more than one hidden layer, each with identical structural and functional properties.

  4. 4.

    Simulations of neural networks with more neurons were at best not found to significantly improve performance, and often degraded performance due to overfitting.

  5. 5.

    Note that this is a stricter prediction criterion than asking the neural network to simply play the NE strategy.

References

  1. Binmore K, McCarthy J, Ponti G, Samuelson L, Shaked A (2002) A backward induction experiment. J Econ Theory 104(1):48–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cho I, Sargent T (1996) Neural networks for encoding and adapting in dynamic economies. Handb Comput Econ 1:441–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cybenko G (1989) Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math Contr Signals Syst 2:303–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dror IE, Gallogly DP (1999) Computational analyses in cognitive neuroscience: in defense of biological implausibility. Psychon Bull Rev 6(2):173–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Funahashi K (1989) On the approximate realization of continuous mappings by neural networks. Neural Netw 2:183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gigerenzer G (2000) Adaptive thinking: rationality in the real world. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gigerenzer G, Selten R (eds) (2001) Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  8. Harsanyi JC, Selten R (1988) A general theory of equilibirum selection in games. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hornik K (1991) Approximation capabilities of multilayer feedforward networks. Neural Netw 4:251–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson EJ, Camerer CF, Sen S, Rymon T (2002) Detecting failures of backward induction: monitoring information search in sequential bargaining experiments. J Econ Theory 104:16–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kettner R, Marcario J, Port N (1993) A neural network model of cortical activity during reaching. J Cogn Neurosci 5:14–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lehky SR, Sejnowski TJ (1988) Network model of shape-from-shading: neural function arises from both receptive and projective fields. Nature 333:452–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mazzoni P, Andersen RA, Jordan MI (1991) A more biologically plausible learning rule than backpropagation applied to a network model of cortical area 7a. Cereb Cortex 1:293–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Robinson T (2000) Biologically plausible back-propagation. Tech. rep., Victoria University of Wellington

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sgroi D, Zizzo D (2009) Learning to play 3 ×3 games: neural networks as bounded-rational players. J Econ Behav Organ 69(1):27–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Spiliopoulos L (2009) Neural networks as a learning paradigm for general normal form games. SSRN eLibrary. http://ssrn.com/paper=1447968

  17. Zipser D, Andersen RA (1988) A back-propagation programmed network that simulates response properties of a subset of posterior parietal neurons. Nature 331:679–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leonidas Spiliopoulos .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer

About this paper

Cite this paper

Spiliopoulos, L. (2011). Learning Backward Induction: A Neural Network Agent Approach. In: Chen, SH., Terano, T., Yamamoto, R. (eds) Agent-Based Approaches in Economic and Social Complex Systems VI. Agent-Based Social Systems, vol 8. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-53907-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics