In Section 4 we shift attention to the computational complexity of agreement, the subject of our deepest technical result. What we want to show is that, even if two agents are computationally bounded, after a conversation of reasonable length they can still probably approximately agree about the expectation of a [0, 1] random variable. A large part of the problem is to say what this even means. After all, if the agents both ignored their evidence and estimated (say) 1⁄2, then they would agree before exchanging even a single message. So agreement is only interesting if the agents have made some sort of “good-faith effort” to emulate Bayesian rationality.
TYPO: This belongs to the section on Aumann’s agreement, but is listed in the problem of priors section
TYPO: This belongs to the section on Aumann’s agreement, but is listed in the problem of priors section
Thanks