Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Constructing quantum games from non-factorizable joint probabilities
arXiv
Authors: Azhar Iqbal, Taksu Cheon
Year
2007
Paper ID
49629
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
140
Citations
N/A
Abstract
A probabilistic framework is developed that gives a unifying perspective on both the classical and the quantum games. We suggest exploiting peculiar probabilities involved in Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiments to construct quantum games. In our framework a game attains classical interpretation when joint probabilities are factorizable and a quantum game corresponds when these probabilities cannot be factorized. We analyze how non-factorizability changes Nash equilibria in two-player games while considering the games of Prisoner's Dilemma, Stag Hunt, and Chicken. In this framework we find that for the game of Prisoner's Dilemma even non-factorizable EPR joint probabilities cannot be helpful to escape from the classical outcome of the game. For a particular version of the Chicken game, however, we find that the two non-factorizable sets of joint probabilities, that maximally violates the Clauser-Holt-Shimony-Horne (CHSH) sum of correlations, indeed result in new Nash equilibria.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2007 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- A probabilistic framework is developed that gives a unifying perspective on both the classical and the quantum games.
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.