See the extensive form game image attached.  1) Solve the game by backward induction   2) Find all the pure-strategy Nash equilibria (in complete contingent plans) of the extensive-form game (no need to write down the normal-form representation)

(J)

3. The following is an interpretation of the rivalry between the United States (USA) and the Soviet Ünion (USSR) during the cold war. Each side has the choice of two strategies: Aggressive and Restrained. The payoff table is given as follows: USSR Restrained Aggressiveness Restrained 4,3 1,4 USA Aggressiveness 3,1 2,2 a) Consider this game when the two countries move simultaneously. Find all pure strategy Nash equilibria. b) Next consider three alternative ways in which the game could be played with sequential moves: (i) The USA moves first and the USSR moves second. (i) the USSR moves first and the USA moves second. (i) The USSR moves first, and the USA moves second, but the USSR has a further move after the USA moves. For each case, draw the game tree and find the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium. c) What are the key strategic issues (commitment, credibility and so on) for the two countries. (Note: Be concise. Your answer should not exceed 300 words].

Consider the game with the payoffs below. Which of the possible outcomes are MORE efficient than the Nash Equilibrium (NE)? Note, they do NOT need to be Nash equilibria themselves, they just need to be more efficient than the NE. Multiple answers are possible, but not necessary. You need to check ALL correct answers for full credit.           JILL          High    Medium    LowMAGGIE    Left    3,4    2,3    2,2Center    4,8    9,7    8,7Right    7,6    8,5    9,4Group of answer choices (Left, Low) There is no strategy combination that is more efficient than the Nash equilibrium for this game. (Right, Medium) (Left, High) (Center, Medium) (Center, High) (Center, Low) (Left, Medium) (Right, Low) (Right, High)