Paper detail

Static Quantum Games Revisited

The so called \emph{quantum game theory} has recently been proclaimed as one of the new branches in the development of both quantum information theory and game theory. However, the notion of a quantum game itself has never been strictly defined, which has led to a lot of conceptual confusion among different authors. In this paper we introduce a new conceptual framework of a \emph{scenario} and an \emph{implementation} of a game. It is shown that the procedures of "quantization" of games proposed in the literature lead in fact to several different games which can be defined within the same scenario, but apart from this they may have nothing in common with the original game. Within the framework we put forward, a lot of conceptual misunderstandings that have arisen around "quantum games" can be stated clearly and resolved uniquely. In particular, the proclaimed essential role of entanglement in several static "quantum games", and their connection with Bell inequalities, is disproved.

preprint2010arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.