Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Lloyd Shapley and chess with imperfect information

Electronic data

  • 1-s2.0-S0899825617302221-main

    Rights statement: This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Games and Economic Behavior. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Games and Economic Behavior, 108, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2017.12.003

    Accepted author manuscript, 1.85 MB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC-ND: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Lloyd Shapley and chess with imperfect information

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>03/2018
<mark>Journal</mark>Games and Economic Behavior
Volume108
Number of pages14
Pages (from-to)600-613
Publication statusPublished
Early online date11/12/17
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

Anyone who has ever studied game theory knows the name Lloyd Shapley. Just recall Matching, Deferred-Acceptance Algorithm, Core, Market Games, Stochastic Games, Shapley value, and Shapley vector.1 But Professor Shapley was also a great lover of chess with imperfect information. Upon our first encounter at Stony Brook in 1998, I was fortunate to investigate the chess problems he set before me. In this essay I analyze some of those problems, in commemoration of Lloyd Shapley's contributions to the study of chess and chess with imperfect information.

Bibliographic note

This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Games and Economic Behavior. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Games and Economic Behavior, 108, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2017.12.003