Chevron Left
ゲーム理論 に戻る

スタンフォード大学(Stanford University) による ゲーム理論 の受講者のレビューおよびフィードバック



Popularized by movies such as "A Beautiful Mind," game theory is the mathematical modeling of strategic interaction among rational (and irrational) agents. Beyond what we call `games' in common language, such as chess, poker, soccer, etc., it includes the modeling of conflict among nations, political campaigns, competition among firms, and trading behavior in markets such as the NYSE. How could you begin to model keyword auctions, and peer to peer file-sharing networks, without accounting for the incentives of the people using them? The course will provide the basics: representing games and strategies, the extensive form (which computer scientists call game trees), Bayesian games (modeling things like auctions), repeated and stochastic games, and more. We'll include a variety of examples including classic games and a few applications. You can find a full syllabus and description of the course here: There is also an advanced follow-up course to this one, for people already familiar with game theory: You can find an introductory video here:




I would have preferred a more mathematically rigorous treatment of the subject. Nevertheless, this was a great course — the instructors expounded all concepts with exceptional clarity and engagement.



Great ! Interesting and abound at the same time. Hope Professors will clarify the strategic utility function more clearly because it's hard for students with poor math basic(forget most><) right now!


ゲーム理論: 751 - 775 / 823 レビュー

by Arcangel M


Me ha parecido un curso introductorio para gente que ya conoce bastante de teoría de juegos. Me parece que se introducen los conceptos de forma poco ordenada y con ejemplos complicados. El contenido matemático se introduce de golpe. Sería interesante más desarrollo desde el comienzo o dejarlo de lado en un anexo si no se va a explicar en detalle.

by Aleksey B


Fix errors in video, presentations, prepare scenario in order to speak without uhm, ehm etc and it would be much better.

The course is very popular so this time investment will worth of doing.

In quizes problems are very easy. Quiz one of the weeks consists of several identical questions differing only in payoffs matrices values, not even sizes.

by loïc t


Sometimes teachers go too fast and there is a lake of explanation (for repetitive extensive form game for example and how to calculate treshold).

Furthermore, quizz often give the correct answer after first error, therefore it's relatively easy to pass even if you don't understand the lesson (but it may be your choice)

by Kolja R


Great introduction into the topic, yet, shows room for improvement in presenting the topic. The gap between "easy to get examples" (to illustrate the concept), and mathematical expression and formulars should be bridged better.

Specifically as the theoretical part appears to be irrelevant for the subsequent exams.

by Henry A


Certain aspects of the course are good, however, a lot of improvements still need to be made in the discussion of the examples in particular the Bayesian theory module, more depth is required and some of the more difficult examples could be addressed. The delivery of Yoav could also definitely be improved.



Not an easy subject to teach but... Video presentations could have been much more engaging. oo many formulas given to digest, without often being given enough qualitative information. Difficulty of exercises too low compared to the complexity of the material. provided

by Peter C


Quite a difficult course to learn and follow, but worth it in the end.

The lectures could benefit from intermediate questions to ensure concepts are understood as explained, more thorough examples and anecdotal explanations, and randomized exam questions.

by Rakesh N


There were few concepts which I felt were not adequately explained - especially Bayesian Games. And I still am not sure what's the practical application of games theory (apart from deciding whether to jump left or right in a soccer penalty).

by Péter S


In general gives a good overview but the theory material does not sufficiently support

the practical usage (solving examples or problems on paper). I needed to read explanations elsewhere (for example youtube gametheroy 101 channel)

by Alexander W


Much more complicated than they let on. Without a knowledge of calculus and other math, it will become very difficult. Additionally, the readings that they have online (not purchased), is not enough to help with the first quiz even.

by Isabella C


The course becomes less and less interesting when the tutors start to cram up notations and try to keep going through concepts after concepts without really getting the learners involved...

by inayat u w


Sometimes what they ask in the weekend tests is way more harder than what is taught and for that i think there should be attached reading material with extra solved and unsolved problems.

by Alex K


Good course, but sometimes I missed some supplementary reading material... when I couldn't quite understand something from the videos alone, it would have been nice to read up on a topic.

by Ram n s


Professor Matt Jackson was the best teacher I have ever experienced online. I also liked the strategy to encourage for pausing the video to think for the answer

by Narayan R


Mathew was fair. Kevin was good. Yoav was not at all comprehensible. His videos were very painful to understand.

Could have had better examples.

by Łukasz W


The course is very interesting and challenging but there are mistakes in the videos and too much mathematical theory with relation to examples.

by Patid


There are very few examples and sample of calculation cause make it so hard to understand the lesson (especially in week6,7 ).

by Nithya N


The examples are getting very abstract. It is getting difficult to understand the concepts with the examples explained.

by Vladimir F


Not all explanations were clear to me, for example the core and Shapley value I took additional materials from web.

by Piyush R


The games needs to be explained in sufficient details. In addition, after a point in time, it became too technical.

by Zhiheng


The topic and the class content itself are good, but the introduction is too brief. Hope they can add more stuff!

by Josh K


Not enough application to remain interesting throughout - disconnect between calculus and concepts.

by Ignacio B


Some clases are not fluid and concepts could be explained in a clearer way.

by Tiago A M


I think it would be more easy to understand the concepts with more examples

by Mike L


The lectures do not give enough examples.

Some lectures are hard to follow.