Not Play 1 Play 1 2 1 Trust Distrust 1 Steal Share 02 10 5 0 5 Find all of the pure strategy Nash Equilibria of this game. There can be more than one equilibrium. [Here ((Not Play, Steal), (Trust)) indicates that player 1 chooses Not Play at the first decision node and Steal at the second decision node, and 2 chooses Trust at his unique decision node.] a) ((Play, Share), (Trust)) b) ((Not play, Share), (Distrust)) c) ((Not play, Steal), (Distrust)) d) ((Not play, Steal), (Trust)) e) ((Play, Steal), (Distrust))

Not Play 1 Play 1 2 1 Trust Distrust 1 Steal Share 02 10 5 0 5 Find all of the pure strategy Nash Equilibria of this game. There can be more than one equilibrium. [Here ((Not Play, Steal), (Trust)) indicates that player 1 chooses Not Play at the first decision node and Steal at the second decision node, and 2 chooses Trust at his unique decision node.] a) ((Play, Share), (Trust)) b) ((Not play, Share), (Distrust)) c) ((Not play, Steal), (Distrust)) d) ((Not play, Steal), (Trust)) e) ((Play, Steal), (Distrust))

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.9P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Two workers are on a production line. They each have two actions: exert effort, E, or shirk, S. Effort costs a worker e > 0 and shirking costs them nothing. If two workers do action E a lot of output is produced and the workers earn £3 each. If only one worker chooses action E less output is produced and they both earn £1. The workers earn nothing if they both shirk. (i) Describe this situation as a strategic form game (assuming the workers do not observe each other's effort choice when making their own decision). (ii) For what values of e does this game have strictly dominant strategies? (iii) Describe the Nash equilibria of this game for e = 0,1, 2, 3. (iv) The workers now are re-arranged into a production line. First worker 1 moves and then worker 2 moves. Worker 2 can now see worker l's effort level before they choose their effort. Draw this extensive form game. (v) Find the subgame perfect equilibria of the production-line game for c = 1/2 and c = 3/2.
Exercise 6.8. Consider the following extensive-form game with cardinal payoffs: 1 R O player pay 000 2 1 M 3 b 010 O player 3's payoff 1 2 221 2 000 0 0 (a) Find all the pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Which ones are also subgame perfect? (b) [This is a more challenging question] Prove that there is no mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium where Player 1 plays Mwith probability strictly between 0 and 1.
(b) ROWENA up Answer 1: up Answer 2: In this simultaneous move game, the iterated dominance equilibrium is (Rowena's . Colin's left left Answer 3: ). This game has two Nash equilibria one of which is the iterated dominance equilibrium. The other Nash equilibrium, which is not the IDE, is (Rowena's down Colin's right down Up Down Answer 4: Left right 0,0 0,0 COLIN Right 0,0 1,1
F G H 1 3 6 3 A 6. 8. 8 5 3 B 3 3 4 4. 9. C 5 3 a.) Find all pure-strategy Nash equilibria of the above game. b.) * Prove that there is a Nash equilibrium in which Player 2 chooses H, while Player 1 chooses A with probability 0.4 and chooses C with probability 0.6. 00 2,
8) Find the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium of the following normal form game. Player 2 T1 T2 T3 2, 3 3, 5 1, 1 Player 1 S2 1, 4 4, 3 0, 5 Player 1 attaches probability (S1, S2) = () and Player 2 attaches probability (T1, T2, T3) = ( ) Player 1 attaches probability (S1, S2) = (.) and Player 2 attaches probability (T1, T2, T3) = (qi, 42, 1 – q1 – 92) where q1 , and 0 < q2 S %3D Player 1 attaches probability (S1, S2) = (G,;) and Player 2 attaches probability (T1, T2, T1) = (qı.42, 1 – q1 – 42) where 0 < qi <, and q2 = 3. Player 1 attaches probability (S1, S) = (;, -) and player 2 attaches probability (T1, T2, T3) = (1.42, 1- q1- 42) where 0 s qı s and q2 =
For the friend-foe game, recall that there were 3 Nash equilibria possible, but the equilibria set didn't include the cooperative outcome, for which both players would win. Friend Foe Friend 500,500 0,1000 Foe 1000,0 0.0 a) If the game is played répeatedly. propose a play strategy that will enforce cooperation. For what valucs of o (discount factor) the equilibrium will be (Friend. Friend)?
Subgames • • • At each node where a player makes a decision, we can think about the "subgame" starting at that node A subgame is the portion of the tree following a particular node How many subgames does our first sequential move example have? • How many subgames does our entry game have? • How many subgames does the game on the right have? • What are its Nash equilibria? Player 1 (1,4) T Player 2 U B (5,2) (3,3) р Player 1 D L 9 (2, 0) Player 2 R (6, 2)
1. Nash Equilibrium (a) Find all pure Nash Equilibria P1/P2 W X Y Z 9,9 0,7 5,5 1,1 7,0 0,0 4,2 7,7 5,5 2,4 0,0 1,1 1,1 7,7 1,1 0,0 A B C D (b) Consider the following picnic game. There are N players in the game each who can chose to bring food to the picnic or not. Let b;= {0, 1} be player i's choice of bringing food with 0 as not and 1 as yes. If they decide to bring food it comes at a cost c;(1) = 1 and no cost to bring food. Payoffs are sum of food brought minus individual cost. i. Write out the normal form matrix if N = 2 ii. If N = 2 find all pure Nash Equilibria iii. Find all pure Nash Equilibria in the general game
2- Consider the following game. Player 2 Player 1 U 12, 2 | 3, 9 5, 8 4, 2 D (a) Find all the Nash equilibria, pure and mixed. (b) Suppose that the payoff of the column player u:(D, L) is reduced from 8 to 6, but all other payoffs remain the same. Again, find all the pure- and mixed-strategy Nash equilibria. (c) Compare the mixed-strategy equilibria in parts (a) and (b). Did this worsening in one of player 2's payoffs change player 2's equilibrium mixed strategy? Did it change player l's? Give some intuition.
3. Player 1 and Player 2 are going to play the following stage game twice: Player 1 Top Bottom Left 4,3 0,0 Player 2 Middle 0,0 2,1 Right 1,4 0,0 There is no discounting in this problem and so a player's payoff in this repeated game is the sum of her payoffs in the two plays of the stage game. (a) Find the Nash equilibria of the stage game. Is (Top, Left) a Nash of the stage game? (b) Find a subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of the repeated game where the first time they play the stage game Player 1 chooses Top and Player 2 chooses Left.
Two politicians from the same party decide whether to support or oppose the gov- ernment's environmental policy. Politician A prefers that they both support, but Politician B prefers that they both oppose. Both politicians agree that the party should have a coherent position and the worst outcome is that one supports and the other opposes the policy. (a) Formulate this situation as a strategic game - specify the players, actions, and payoffs (you can set-up a table of the actions and payoffs). (b) What are the Nash equilibria of this game? Explain your answer.
W X Y Z 47, 15| 39, 41 45, 53 12, 56 In equilibrium, what is the probability that player 1 will use the pure strategy X in this game?