Template talk:Payoff matrix


 * Talk page moved from Template talk:2x2 game ~ trialsanderrors 08:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

deliberating
A couple of things I've been deliberating: Any input is appreciated. ~ trialsanderrors 00:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Should the title of the game appear as a caption?
 * Should payoff matrix appear somewhere in the template?
 * Should the payoffs for both player appear in one field?
 * Should the template be renamed "Template:Payoff matrix" to accommodate future expansion to 2x3 and 3x3 games?


 * Hmm. Here are my thought:
 * Caption: I don't think its needed. I like the title above better and both would be redundant.
 * "Payoff matrix" I don't know about others, but I usually wikilink payoff matrix when talking about it in the article, so this shouldn't be necessary
 * Single field: This might not be a bad idea, it would enable other types of matrices (where only the row payoff is presented for instance, cf. Payoff matrix).
 * The only nxn game matrix we have is on Nash equilibrium, I think. So, it might be more work than necessary.  Perhaps we should only cross this bridge if we need to.
 * None of my opinions are particularly strong, so if anyone has any strong opinions... --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 01:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Kevin here, except that I have a weak preference for payoff in separate fields. That being said, I can see how this mucks up the row only matrices.  We can rename if (preferably when) we have NxM matrices.  Good stuff. Pete.Hurd 02:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you mean the bottom-left/top-right notation? I usually prefer that one for teaching, since it's more intuitive, but I saw various comments that it's not standard notation. In any case it's definitely codeable. I'd rather settle the name issue now before we start using it in too many articles. ~ trialsanderrors 03:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, bottom left\top right, I like that one best. If it were any of the others, I wouldn't think it worth the effort. ...not that I'm saying row\column is necessarily either. Pete.Hurd 06:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * We might revisit abandoning bottom left/top right notation. I think one of the initial concerns was that the code was very ugly, but with a template this problem disappears.  I'm pretty neutral on the two, personally.  --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 06:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I just tried it but ran into problems because CSS doesn't recognize valign commands, so we would have to create a workaround. ~ trialsanderrors 06:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
 * What I did was create little tables inside of each cell. So for example:


 * Would be one cell. Hence, incredibly ugly code :) --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 07:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Ahhhh, I'd pull the rip-cord on this and move on to more productive things, one field is good enough for rock & roll... my 2c. Pete.Hurd 22:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

non-game theory use
I've added a non-game theory use for this template at Common good (economics) (another article on goods that should be merged). ~ trialsanderrors 16:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

How about adding Players to the Matrix? -- some code I put together
I'm pretty new to Wikipedia and don't know how to make or edit a template. I would like to have Player identified in a payoff matrix. I've written the following code that does that; perhaps it is worth modifying the Payoff Matrix template or creating a new one. I'll probably use this in the Strategy_(game_theory) article to illustrate mixed strategies.

editeur24 (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This seems doable, although you might want to create a variant template "Payoff matrix players" to not break all the unnamed matrices already in use. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 15:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

-