Monopolistic Competition, Oligopoly, and Game Theory: End of Chapter Problems10. Poker players are known to bluff once in a while, meaning that they will make a large bet despite holding inferior cardsin an effort to pressure other players to fold their hands.Would bluffing be considered a dominant strategy in poker?Yes, because it is the main strategy used by players.O No, because if a player bluffs on every hand, other players will catch on and call his or her bluff.No, because bluffing is usually not successful and is therefore considered a secondary strategy.Yes, because it usually results in a winning hand.IncorrectQuestion Source: Chiang 4e - Economics Principles For A Changing World Publisher: Worth Publi11:12 PM44°F12/13/2021近

When analyzing a game theory, there is a need to understand the behavior of the players to make…

Monopolistic Competition, Oligopoly, and Game Theory: End of Chapter Problems 10. Poker players are known to bluff once in a while, meaning that they will make a large bet despite holding inferior cards in an effort to pressure other players to fold their hands. Would bluffing be considered a dominant strategy in poker? Yes, because it is the main strategy used by players. No, because if a player bluffs on every hand, other players will catch on and call his or her bluff. No, because bluffing is usually not successful and is therefore considered a secondary strategy. Yes, because it usually results in a winning hand. Incorrect

Monopolistic Competition, Oligopoly, and Game Theory: End of Chapter Problems 10. Poker players are known to bluff once in a while, meaning that they will make a large bet despite holding inferior cards in an effort to pressure other players to fold their hands. Would bluffing be considered a dominant strategy in poker? Yes, because it is the main strategy used by players. No, because if a player bluffs on every hand, other players will catch on and call his or her bluff. No, because bluffing is usually not successful and is therefore considered a secondary strategy. Yes, because it usually results in a winning hand. Incorrect

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.6P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Does each individual in a prisoners dilemma benefit more from cooperation or from pursuing self-interest? Explain briefly.
Little Kona is a small coffee company that is considering entering a market dominated by Big Brew. Each company's profit depends on whether Little Kona enters and whether Big Brew sets a high price or a low price: Little Kona True True or False: Only Little Kona has a dominant strategy in this game. False Big Brew High Price Low Price Enter $2 million, $3 million $2 million, $1 million Don't Enter 50, 58 million $0, $3 million Which of the following outcomes represent a Nash equilibrium in this case? Check all that apply. Big Brew maintains a high price and Little Kona does not enter. Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona does not enter. Big Brew maintains a high price and Little Kona enters. Big Brew maintains a low price and Little Kona enters. Big Brew threatens Little Kona by saying, "If you enter, we're going to set a low price, so you had better stay out." Thin True or False: Little Kona should believe the threat.
20) Given the payoff matrix in the figure, the Nash equilibrium outcome of this game is for: Ajinomoto Produce 30 Produce 40 million pounds million pounds Ajinomoto makes $180 million Ajinomoto makes $200 million Produce 30 million ADM makes $180 million ADM makes $150 million pounds Ajinomoto makes $150 million Ajinomoto makes $160 million Produce 40 million ADM makes $200 million ADM makes $160 million pounds O A. each firm to produce 30 million pounds. B. each firm to produce 40 million pounds. C. ADM to produce 30 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 40 million pounds. D. ADM to produce 40 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 30 million pounds. ADM
in this game table, Pepsi's payout is on the left and Sam's Choice's is on the ight. Is the Nash equilibrium a prisoner's dilemma? Pepsi High Low Sam's Choice High 110, 20 60, 10 Low 80, 40 70, 30 O No, it is not because both firms played their dominant strategies. O Yes, it is because the combined payoff for the two firms is lower than another outcome. O Yes, it is because at least one of the firms ends up with the lowest possible payoff. O No, it is not because at least one firm has achieved its highest possible payoff.
2. Consider the following game. Assume that this game is played simultaneously and without collusion. The two companies are choosing between two strategies: go international or stay national. The outcomes of each strategy for each company are given the following payoff matrix: a) Find Nash equilibrium in this game. Interpret the equilibrium you found. b) What is the Chipco's dominant strategy, if it has one? How shall Chipco's payoffs change for it to not have a dominant strategy anymore?
2. Consider the following game table: Rowena Top Middle Bottom North 4, 3,5 3 Colin South 2 2, 3,4 East 3, 1 2,3 4,2 a. Complete the payoffs of the game table above so that Colin has a dominant strategy. State which strategy is dominant and explain why. (Note: There are many equally correct answers.) Complete the payoffs of the game table above so that neither player has a dominant strategy, but also so that each player does have a dominated strategy. State which strategies are dominated and explain why. (Again, there are many equally correct answers.) b.
Wal-Mart's dominant strategy is to pick a price of $. Target Price = $30 Price = $17 %3D What is the Nash equilibrium for this game? $6,000 $1,500 O A. The Nash equilibrium is for Target to choose a price of $17 and Wal-Mart to choose a price of $30. Price = $30 $6,000 $11,000 O B. The Nash equilibrium is for Target and Wal-Mart to both choose a price of $30. Wal - Mart C. The Nash equilibrium is for Target to choose a price of $30 and Wal-Mart to choose a price of $17. $11,000 $4,500 Price = $17 %3D $1,500 $4,500 O D. The Nash equilibrium is for Target and Wal-Mart to both choose a price of $17. South OE. O E. A Nash equilibrium does not exist for this game.
5. The following problem was first considered by John von Neumann and is a fundamentalresult game theory.A and B play the following game:A writes down either number 1 or number 2, and B must guess which one.If the number that A has written down is i and B has guessed correctly, B receives i units from A.If B makes a wrong guess, B pays 4/5 of a unit to A.First we consider the expected gain of player B.Suppose B guesses 1 with probability p and 2 with probability 1 −p.Let X1 denote B’s gain (or loss) in a game where A has written down 1.Let X2 denote B’s gain (or loss) in a game where A has written down 2.(a) Find the pmf of X1 and X2(b) Find B’s expected gain for these two cases, E[X1] and E[X2].(c) What value of p maximizes the minimum possible value of B’s expected gain?Now consider the expected loss of player ASuppose that A writes down 1 with probability q and 2 with probability 1 −q.Let Y1 be A’s loss (or gain) if B chooses number 1.Let Y2 be A’s loss (or gain) if B…
5. To advertise or not to advertise Suppose that two firms, Lucky Bird and Full Coop, are the only sellers of seitan buffalo wings in some hypothetical market. The following payoff matrix gives the profit (in millions of dollars) earned by each company depending on whether or not it chooses to advertise: Lucky Bird Full Coop Advertise Advertise 9,9 Doesn't Advertise 3, 15 Doesn't Advertise 15,3 11, 11 For example, the lower left cell of the matrix shows that if Full Coop advertises and Lucky Bird does not advertise, Full Coop will make a profit of $15 million, and Lucky Bird will make a profit of $3 million. Assume this is a simultaneous game and that Lucky Bird and Full Coop are both profit- maximizing firms. If Lucky Bird chooses to advertise, it will earn a profit of S advertise. If Lucky Bird chooses not to advertise, it will earn a profit of s not advertise. million if Full Coop advertises and a profit of If Full Coop advertises, Lucky Bird makes a higher profit if it chooses…
Solve for the Nash equilibrium (or equilibria) in each of the following games. (a) The following two-by-two game is a little harder to solve since firm 2’spreferred strategy depends of what firm 1 does. But firm 1 has a dominantstrategy so this game has one Nash equilibrium. Firm 2 Launch Don’tFirm 1 Launch 60, -10 100, 0 Don’t 80, 30 120, 0 What is the Nash equilibrium of this simultaneous-move game? (b) What would the outcome of this game be if instead firm 1 moved first and then, after seeing what firm 1 chose, firm 2 chose it strategy? In this case firm 1 doesn’t necessarily need to choose a best response, but firm 2 must choose a best response since it moves second.
O Attempt 1 Monopolistic Competition, Oligopoly, and Game Theory: End of Chapter Problems Which of the following are reasons why repeated games make overcoming the Prisoner's Dilemma easier compared to a game played only once? 5. Repeated games O have a payoff structure that is not structured like the classic Prisoner's Dilemma, i.e., where the dominant strategy for both players is to defect. allow players to reap repeated windfalls in consecutive games, preventing opponents from engaging in unfair behavior. V enable players to retaliate against players for unfair behavior. open the game to strategies unavailable to players of games played just once. Incorrect Publisher: Worth Publishers Question Source: Chiang 4e - Economics Principles For A Changing World 11:41 PM 43°F 12/13/2021 a
8. To advertise or not to advertise Suppose that Creamland and Dairy King are the only two firms that sell ice cream. The following payoff matrix shows the profit (in millions of dollars) each company will earn depending on whether or not it advertises: Creamland Dairy King Advertises Doesn't Advertise 9,9 Doesn't Advertise 3, 15 Advertises 15, 3 11, 11 For example, the upper-right cell shows that, if Creamland advertises and Dairy King doesn't advertise, Creamland will make a profit of $15 million, and Dairy King will make a profit of $3 million. Assume this is a simultaneous game and that Creamland and Dairy King are both profit-maximizing firms. If Creamland decides to advertise, it will earn a profit of $ not advertise. If Creamland decides not to advertise, it will earn a profit of $ does not advertise. million if Dairy King advertises and a profit of $ If Dairy King advertises, Creamland makes a higher profit if it chooses million if Dairy King advertises and a profit of $…