In the time since the merger of quantum mechanics and game theory was proposed formally in 1999, the two distinct perspectives apparent in this merger of applying quantum mechanics to game theory, referred to henceforth as the theory of ``quantized games'', and of applying game theory to quantum mechanics, referred to henceforth as ``gaming the quantum'', have become synonymous under the single ill-defined term ``quantum game''. Here, these two perspectives are delineated and a game-theoretically proper description of what makes a multiplayer, non-cooperative game quantum mechanical, is given. Within the context of this description, finding Nash equilibrium in a zero-sum quantum game is exhibited to be equivalent to finding a solution to a simultaneous distance minimization problem in the state space of quantum objects, thus setting up a framework for a game theory inspired study of ``equilibrium'' behavior of quantum physical systems such as those utilized in quantum information processing and computation.
In the time since the merger of quantum mechanics and game theory was proposed formally in 1999, the two distinct perspectives apparent in this merger of applying quantum mechanics to game theory, referred to henceforth as the theory of quantized games'', and of applying game theory to quantum mechanics, referred to henceforth as gaming the quantum'', have become synonymous under the single ill-defined term quantum game''. Here, these two perspectives are delineated and a game-theoretically proper description of what makes a multiplayer, non-cooperative game quantum mechanical, is given. Within the context of this description, finding Nash equilibrium in a zero-sum quantum game is exhibited to be equivalent to finding a solution to a simultaneous distance minimization problem in the state space of quantum objects, thus setting up a framework for a game theory inspired study of equilibrium'' behavior of quantum physical systems such as those utilized in quantum information processing and computation.
In the time since a merger of quantum mechanics and game theory was proposed formally in 1999, the two distinct perspectives apparent in this merger of applying quantum mechanics to game theory, referred to henceforth as the theory of "quantized games", and of applying game theory to quantum mechanics, referred to henceforth as "gaming the quantum", have become synonymous under the single ill-defined term "quantum game". Here, these two perspectives are delineated and a game-theoretically proper description of what makes a multi-player, non-cooperative game quantum mechanical, is given. Within the context of this description, finding a Nash equilibrium in a strictly competitive quantum game is shown to be equivalent to finding a solution to a simultaneous best approximation problem in the state space of quantum objects, thus setting up a framework for a game theory inspired study of "equilibrium" behavior of quantum physical systems such as those utilized in quantum information processing and computation.
Quantum games have proposed a new point of view for the solution of the classical problems and dilemmas in game theory. Certain quantization relationships can be proposed with the objective that a game can be generalized into a quantum domain where the linear superposition of actions is allowed. This quantization let us describe and solution problems originated by conflicting or cooperative behaviors among the members of a system from the point of view of quantum mechanical interactions. This leads us to interesting aspects which only can be observed through the quantization of a game like the possibility of the entanglement between players, the definition of a socioeconomical temperature in a system, the collective welfare principle,the analysis of a game through elements of quantum information theory and the globalization process. The relationships between quantum mechanics and game theory are also studied and its shown how although both systems analyzed are described through two theories apparently different (quantum mechanics and game theory) both are analogous and thus exactly equivalents.
Since the establishment of von Neumann and Nash's concept of equilibrium, game theory has become a universal language in economics and social sciences. However, classical game theory is deeply rooted in the mechanistic worldview, and its deterministic assumptions, static equilibrium, and individualistic methodology are becoming increasingly inadequate in explaining the emergence of cooperation, uncertainty, and complex social interactions. This book directly faces this dilemma and introduces the core concepts of quantum mechanics into game analysis, constructing a complete system of quantum game theory. Starting from the century long evolution of game theory, the entire book deeply criticizes the mechanistic nature of classical game theory, and re establishes the philosophical foundation of game theory through practical ontology. On this basis, this book proposes the hypothesis of a "quantum gamer" and constructs a complete analytical framework from superposition strategy space, quantum entanglement to measurement collapse. The system reconstructs core areas such as quantum zero sum games, quantum non-zero sum games, quantum prisoner's dilemma, quantum coordination games, quantum evolutionary games, quantum cooperative games, and quantum incomplete information games, and extends them to cutting-edge directions such as quantum repetitive games, quantum game learning, and quantum mechanism design. At the application level, this book comprehensively demonstrates the broad prospects of quantum game theory in fields such as economics, political science, sociology, biology, computer science, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and ethics. This book emphasizes that quantum entanglement enables cooperation to emerge, and quantum measurement leads equilibrium from static to dynamic collapse, thus surpassing the explanatory boundaries of classical game theory. The book has a rigorous structure and in-depth arguments, combining theoretical originality with interdisciplinary perspectives, providing a groundbreaking work for researchers, graduate students, and cutting-edge explorers to understand the quantum game revolution.
This work concentrates on simultaneous move non-cooperating quantum games. Part of it is evidently not new, but it is included for the sake self consistence, as it is devoted to introduction of the mathematical and physical grounds of the pertinent topics, and the way in which a simple classical game is modified to become a quantum game (a procedure referred to as a quantization of a classical game). The connection between game theory and information science is briefly stressed, and the role of quantum entanglement (that plays a central role in the theory of quantum games), is exposed. Armed with these tools, we investigate some basic concepts like the existence (or absence) of a pure strategy and mixed strategy Nash equilibrium and its relation with the degree of entanglement. The main results of this work are as follows: 1) Construction of a numerical algorithm based on the method of best response functions, designed to search for pure strategy Nash equilibrium in quantum games. The formalism is based on the discretization of a continuous variable into a mesh of points, and can be applied to quantum games that are built upon two-players two-strategies classical games, based on the method of best response functions. 2) Application of this algorithm to study the question of how the existence of pure strategy Nash equilibrium is related to the degree of entanglement (specified by a continuous parameter γ ). It is shown that when the classical game GC has a pure strategy Nash equilibrium that is not Pareto efficient, then the quantum game GQ with maximal entanglement (γ = π/2) has no pure strategy Nash equilibrium. By studying a non-symmetric prisoner dilemma game, it is found that there is a critical value 0γc such that for γγc there is a pure strategy Nash equilibrium and for γ≥γc there is no pure strategy Nash equilibrium. The behavior of the two payoffs as function of γ starts at that of the classical ones at (D, D) and approaches the cooperative classical ones at (C, C) (C = confess, D = don’t confess). 3) We then study Bayesian quantum games and show that under certain conditions, there is a pure strategy Nash equilibrium in such games even when entanglement is maximal. 4) We define the basic ingredients of a quantum game based on a two-player three strategies classical game. This requires the introduction of trits (instead of bits) and quantum trits (instead of quantum bits). It is proved that in this quantum game, there is no classical commensurability in the sense that the classical strategies are not obtained as a special case of the quantum strategies.
We present a perspective on quantum games that focuses on the physical aspects of the quantities that are used to implement a game. If a game is to be played, it has to be played with objects and actions that have some physical existence. We call such games playable. By focusing on the notion of playability for games we can more clearly see the distinction between classical and quantum games and tackle the thorny issue of what it means to quantize a game. The approach we take can more properly be thought of as gaming the quantum rather than quantizing a game and we find that in this perspective we can think of a complete quantum game, for a given set of preferences, as representing a single family of quantum games with many different playable versions. The versions of Quantum Prisoners Dilemma presented in the literature can therefore be thought of specific instances of the single family of Quantum Prisoner's Dilemma with respect to a particular measurement. The conditions for equilibrium are given for playable quantum games both in terms of expected outcomes and a geometric approach. We discuss how any quantum game can be simulated with a classical game played with classical coins as far as the strategy selections and expected outcomes are concerned.