Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Is there any relationship between the minimax theorems $$ \mbox{Regularly hypothesis on } f:U\times V\to\mathbb{R} \implies \min_{u}\max_{v}f(u,v)=\max_{v}\min_{u}f(u,v) $$ and fixed point theorems $$ \mbox{Regularly hypothesis on } F:X\to X \implies F(x)=x, \mbox{ for some } x\in X ? $$ More precisely, there is some kind teorem minimax implies some fixed point theorem? Or fixed point theorem implies some type minimax theorem?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted
+50

One direction is given historically in game theory. Nash's result on the existence of Nash equilibria, essentially a fixed point theorem, implies the minimax theorem of von Neumann. Here is the coarse structure of the argument. We want to rewrite $$f:U\times V\to\mathbb{R} \implies \min_{u}\max_{v}f(u,v)=\max_{v}\min_{u}f(u,v)$$ as the solution to a fixed point problem. For this we have to generalize the idea of a fixed point to correspondences, or set-valued mappings. If $\phi:S\to 2^S$ maps points in $S$ to subsets of $S$, we say that $s$ is a fixed point of $\phi$ if $s\in\phi(s)$. One can often prove fixed point theorems for correspondences from fixed point theorems for functions by using selection or approximation theorems.

So we define a correspondence $F:U\times V\to 2^{U\times V}$ by letting $$F(u,v)=\{u'\in U:u'\text{ minimizes } f(\cdot,v)\}\times\{v'\in V:v'\text{ maximizes } f(u,\cdot)\}.$$ Now the fixed points of $F$ are exactly the solutions to the minimax problem.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.