Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Machine Learning
Experimental Validation of Quantum Game Theory
arXiv
Authors: Matthias Hanauske, Steffen Bernius, Wolfgang Köenig, Berndt Dugall
Year
2007
Paper ID
49615
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
103
Citations
N/A
Abstract
This article uses data from two experimental studies of two-person Prisoner's Dilemma games [1, 2] and compares the data with the theoretic predictions calculated with the use of a quantum game theoretical method. The experimental findings of the cooperation percentage Cp indicate a strong connectivity with the properties of a novel function (N), which depends on the payoff parameters of the game and the entanglement parameter . A classification scheme depending on four quantum cooperation indicators is developed to describe cooperation in real two-person games. The quantum indicators lead to results, that are at least as good as the cooperation predictions derived from classical game theory.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2007 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- This article uses data from two experimental studies of two-person Prisoner's Dilemma games [1, 2] and compares the data with the theoretic predictions calculated with the use...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.