ABSTRACT
Academic circles have broadly accepted two ways to divide game theory research. One, from the angle of the participants’ action order, divided game theory into static games and dynamic games. The other, from the angle of one’s knowledge about his or her counterpart’s characteristics, strategic space, and payment functions, divided it into complete information games and incomplete information games. In essence, the second way mainly concerns the understanding of others’ information in the game; complete and incomplete information here means symmetric and asymmetric information respectively.
