Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Modnote: This question was manually migrated (closed and crossposted) to MathOverflow by request of the OP.

Quantum game theory is an extension of classical game theory to the quantum domain. It differs from classical game theory in three primary ways:

  1. Superposed initial states,
  2. Quantum entanglement of initial states,
  3. Superposition of strategies to be used on the initial states.

This theory is based on the physics of information much like quantum computing.

I wondered if QGT is reducible to classical GT, i.e., whether any quantum game can be transformed to some classical game.

Related issues: To prove the opposite, would we need a space-like separation between players' acts? Would one need Bell's theorem? Should players' acts be outside each other's light-cones? Do we have to appeal to physics (e.g., QM itself and/or GR)? Would we need counterfactual definiteness? Would we need to dismiss superdeterminism? Are, some or all, such issues already covered (by hidden assumptions) in classical game theory or even economics?

Can anyone perhaps point to relevant literature that specifically deals with this (the title) question?

share|cite|improve this question

closed as off-topic by Alexander Gruber Jul 4 '13 at 19:33

  • This question does not appear to be about math within the scope defined in the help center.
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

I never understood the point of quantum GT. Maybe, this is useful. – Michael Greinecker Apr 21 '13 at 18:06
@MichaelGreinecker Thanks for the link. Do you mean that you wonder like me, or perhaps that you assume/believe/think/know that QGT has no field of application? Or both? – Keep these mind Apr 21 '13 at 18:22
What I know about QGT is mostly from aXriv surveys. My impression is that the people in this field are from a different planet and what they write about classic GT isn't GT as I know it. So I think it is very hard o relate to. – Michael Greinecker Apr 21 '13 at 18:53
This question was too old to migrate and has been reposted to MathOverflow: – Alexander Gruber Jul 4 '13 at 19:33