Consider the following simplified bargaining game. Players 1 and 2 have preferences over two goods, x and y. Player 1 is endowed with one unit of good x and none of good y, while Player 2 is endowed with one unit of y and none of good x. Player i has utility function: min{xi, yi} where xi is i's consumption of x and yi his consumption of y. The "bargaining" works as follows. Each player simultaneously hands any (nonnegative) quantity of the good he possesses (up to his entire endowment) to the other player.
(a) Write this as a game in normal form.
(b) Find all pure strategy equilibria of this game.
(c) Does this game have a dominant strategy equilibrium? If so, what is it? If not, why not?
Please show all work.
Note:-
- Do not provide handwritten solution. Maintain accuracy and quality in your answer. Take care of plagiarism.
- Answer completely.
- You will get up vote for sure.
Trending nowThis is a popular solution!
Step by stepSolved in 3 steps
redo queestion 1 and question 3
redo queestion 1 and question 3
- For various values of X(for player1 and player 2), find all Nash equilibria of the following game with von Neumann-Morgenstern preferences:arrow_forwardFor various values of X(for player1 and player 2), find all Nash equilibria of the following game with von Neumann-Morgenstern preferences:arrow_forwardConsider two players, designated by i = 1,2, involved in a dynamic bargaining over a perfectly divisible surplus of size 1. At the beginning of the interaction (at timet 1), player 1 chooses x1 in [0, 1]. Player 2 observes this offer and decides whether or not to accept it. If player 2 accepts this offer, the game ends and the utilities of player 1 and 2 equal x1 and 1- x1, respectively. If player 2 does not accept this offer, the game goes into the second round with a probability of \pi = 2|1/2-x11, while with probability 1 -\ pi the game ends and both players get a payoff of 0. If the game reaches the second round, t = 2, player 2 makes a counter-offer x2 in [0, 1] observing the whole past. Player 1 sees this offer and decides whether or not to accept it. If player 1 accepts x2, then the game ends and player 1 gets a payoff of x2 and player 2 a utility of 1 - x2. Both players get a payoff of zero when player 1 rejects player 2's offer x2 and the game ends. We assume that the game is…arrow_forward
- Two friends are deciding where to go for dinner. There are three choices, which we label A, B, and C. Max prefers A to B to C. Sally prefers B to A to C. To decide which restaurant to go to, the friends adopt the following procedure: First, Max eliminates one of three choices. Then, Sally decides among the two remaining choices. Thus, Max has three strategies (eliminate A, eliminate B, and eliminate C). For each of those strategies, Sally has two choices (choose among the two remaining). a.Write down the extensive form (game tree) to represent this game. b.If Max acts non-strategically, and makes a decision in the first period to eliminate his least desirable choice, what will the final decision be? c.What is the subgame-perfect equilibrium of the above game? d. Does your answer in b. differ from your answer in c.? Explain why or why not. Only typed Answerarrow_forwardAsaaaparrow_forward2arrow_forward
- The US and Canada have overfished North Atlantic cod stocks nearly to the point of extinction. Both countries wish to preserve the cod industry (and hence the cod stocks), so the two countries sign an agreement to limit fish hauls. Each country has two possible strategies: comply with the agreement (limit fishing) or renege on the agreement (overfish). Each country’s payoffs for different strategy combinations are given in the matrix below. The numbers in the cells represent utilities, and the payoff ordering is (US, Canada). QUESTIONS: 1.If this is a one-shot game (i.e., it is played once), do the players have a dominant strategy? If so, what is it? Briefly explain your answer. 2.What is the equilibrium of this game? Is it Pareto-optimal? How do you know?arrow_forward7arrow_forwardSuppose a $1 bill is to be divided between two players according to a simultaneous-move, one-shot bargaining game. Is there a Nash equilibrium to the bargaining game if the smallest unit in which the money can be divided is $0.01? Assume that if the players ask for more in total than is available, they go home empty-handed.arrow_forward
- Principles of Economics (12th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134078779Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. OsterPublisher:PEARSONEngineering Economy (17th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134870069Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick KoellingPublisher:PEARSON
- Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage LearningManagerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage LearningManagerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...EconomicsISBN:9781259290619Author:Michael Baye, Jeff PrincePublisher:McGraw-Hill Education