This was a wonderful and very mathematically intensive course, but completing all the quizzes gave a great sense of accomplishment and developed my understanding of game theory and its various facets.
Very interesting! One missing thing: please write explanations for correct/incorrect questions in quizzes. In the basic course, I found them very helpful in understanding why my reasoning was wrong.
автор: L H•
This is an absolutely fascinating course! I wish the instructors could have gone into more depth about each of the topics and also provided explanations to the problem sets like the case in the first course - the explanations helped a lot with my understanding. Nevertheless, a great introduction to the advanced applications of game theory and I look forward to a third installment!
автор: ZHU S•
The lecture are useful and the lecturer clear in their content and delivery. However, it would be better if more practices with answers can be given, and the tutorial should include questions of greater difficulty, such as those with real game settings and rules to solve for optimum strategy.
автор: Mikel N•
Not only it's a very interesting course, but also is offered free with graded quizes included. I wish it had been a little more extended, because subject is complex enough to expand it at least two or three more weeks.
автор: george v•
Great course. Nice retracing of some notions of the course Game Theory like Pareto Oprimality. Nice idea doing some examples on auctions and voting systems. Nice proofs
автор: Ajay K V•
Great course. Very relevant to a lot of problems in business. Content was overtly mathematical. More practical examples cold have been interesting to solve.
автор: Matthew W•
A lot of the important results were covered but sometimes results came out of nowhere (for example with optimal auctions and virtual valuations).
Overall, the course was good. Somehow, the concepts were not as clear as the basic game theory course. Definitely more advanced.
автор: Chow K M•
The quizzes should come with feedback on explaining the answers. It will greatly aid learning.
автор: Ryan B•
A good class with a good formal description and examples of game theoretic concepts.
автор: Koa Y•
Great course, I was really overdue but am hoping to get a certificate if possible
автор: Affandi I•
Great course, but I think It could be more vivid like its predecessor
автор: Roland R•
Great Course, same parts are challenging but i learned a lot about
автор: Hushan J•
it's better to give explanations of the quiz when it is passed.
автор: Daniel A M S•
It was nice to have a second part with more specific subjects.
автор: Arshia S•
This course gave me amazing insight into game theory.
автор: Muhua X•
It is very challenging but also interesting
автор: Javier F G•
The quizzes are not well designed.
автор: carlo p•
Excellent skills obtained
автор: Mufizul I•
автор: Fred V•
Auction theory is left to the last lecture, and the influence of voting systems on political mechanisms is barely addressed. 3 different people lecturing, with different communication skills and flaws (hesitations, over-notating, abuse of acronyms), make following the course more difficult than it needs to be. These being said, it is clear that the authors more than know their stuff (at least the theoretical part; we would like to see them perform when bargaining in a souk) and bring a lot into the course.
автор: Cigdem K•
The exams did not explain why the wrong answers are wrong. Even after you succeed a test, I expect an explanation of the questions, and the correct answers. Even if I have a correct answer to a question, I don't know if my reasoning is correct..
автор: Telmo J P P•
Interesting, but not as good as part I. Some parts of the syllabus were not explained well enough: a lot of results just come out of thin air, and not a lot of intuitions are given.
Diverse course, which covered various topics. For the election processes however one could some illegal practices, which also could lead to a win. A democratic win...
автор: Martín B•
Should have much more real examples. Voting schemes was right, but mechanism design was completely abstract