EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
12th Edition
ISBN: 9781305176386
Author: Snyder
Publisher: YUZU
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 17.3, Problem 1.3MQ
To determine
Probability to choose C rather than E .
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
With what probability does player 1 play Down in the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium? (Input your
answer as a decimal to the nearest hundredth, for example: 0.14, 0.56, or 0.87).
PLAYER 1
Up
Down
PLAYER 2
Left
97,95
47, 33
Right
8,43
68,91
In a mixed strategy equilibrium of the game below, what is the probability with which Player 2 chooses r (if
there are multiple equilibria with different probabilities of a, choose any one)?
Player 2
y
a
3, 3
4, 2
Player 1
b
6,3
2, 6
5. 3
3, 2
Numerical answer
Imagine that a zealous prosecutor (P) has accused a defendant (D) of committing a crime. Suppose that the trial involves evidence production by bothparties and that by producing evidence, a litigant increases the probabilityof winning the trial. Specifically, suppose that the probability that the defendant wins is given by eD>(eD + eP), where eD is the expenditure on evidenceproduction by the defendant and eP is the expenditure on evidence production by the prosecutor. Assume that eD and eP are greater than or equal to0. The defendant must pay 8 if he is found guilty, whereas he pays 0 if heis found innocent. The prosecutor receives 8 if she wins and 0 if she losesthe case.
(a) Represent this game in normal form.(b) Write the first-order condition and derive the best-response function foreach player.(c) Find the Nash equilibrium of this game. What is the probability that thedefendant wins in equilibrium.(d) Is this outcome efficient? Why?
Chapter 17 Solutions
EBK INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS AND ITS
Ch. 17.3 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.1MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 2.2MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1.3MQCh. 17.3 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.3 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2TTA
Ch. 17.4 - Prob. 1.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.1TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.4 - Prob. 1.2TTACh. 17.4 - Prob. 2.2TTACh. 17.5 - Prob. 1MQCh. 17.5 - Prob. 2MQCh. 17.6 - Prob. 1TTACh. 17.6 - Prob. 2TTACh. 17 - Prob. 1RQCh. 17 - Prob. 2RQCh. 17 - Prob. 3RQCh. 17 - Prob. 4RQCh. 17 - Prob. 5RQCh. 17 - Prob. 6RQCh. 17 - Prob. 7RQCh. 17 - Prob. 8RQCh. 17 - Prob. 9RQCh. 17 - Prob. 10RQCh. 17 - Prob. 17.1PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.2PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.3PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.4PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.5PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.6PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.7PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.8PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.9PCh. 17 - Prob. 17.10P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- EXERCISE 3.a. Show that if G; has value v; for i = 1, 2, then their series-sum game has value v₁ + v₂.arrow_forward5.Each of Player 1 and Player 2 chooses an integer from the set {1, 2, ..., K}. If they choose the same integer, P1 gets +1 and P2 gets -1; if they choose different integers, P1 gets -1 and P2 gets +1. (a) Show that it is a NE for each player to choose every integer in {1, 2, ..., K} with equal probability, K1 . (b) Show that there are no NE besides the one you found in (a).arrow_forwardIs it possible that Step. 3 contains a contradiction? As "If Player 1 plays Ball (B): Player 2 meets (M) if the expected payoff of meeting is greater than the expected payoff of avoiding." and then, "If Player 1 has Dinner (D): Player 2 meets (M) if the expected payoff of meeting is greater than the expected payoff of avoiding." The same arises in the one for player 2. Is for both the second sentence meant to be "smaller than"? If not, please elaborate.arrow_forward
- The mixed stratergy nash equalibrium consists of : the probability of firm A selecting October is 0.692 and probability of firm A selecting December is 0.309. The probability of firm B selecting October is 0.5 and probability of firm selecting December is 0.5. In the equilibrium you calculated above, what is the probability that both consoles are released in October? In December? What are the expected payoffs of firm A and of firm B in equilibrium?arrow_forward$11. Anne and Bruce would like to rent a movie, but they can't decide what kind of movie to get: Anne wants to rent a comedy, and Bruce wants to watch a drama. They decide to choose randomly by playing "Evens or Odds." On the count of three, each of them shows one or two fingers. If the sum is even, Anne wins and they rent the comedy; if the sum is odd, Bruce wins and they rent the drama. Each of them earns a payoff of 1 for winning and 0 for losing "Evens or Odds." (a) Draw the game table for "Evens or Odds." (b) Demonstrate that this game has no Nash equilibrium in pure strategies.arrow_forward(b) Consider the simultaneous-move game below with two players, 1 and 2. Each player has two pure strategies. If a player plays both strategies with strictly positive probability, we call it a strictly mixed strategy for that player. Show that there is no Nash equilibrium in which both 1 and 2 play a strictly mixed strategy. Player 2 b₁ b₂ Player 1 a₁ 3,0 0,1 a2 2,1 2,1arrow_forward
- 6. Players 1 and 2 are leaving the house and need to decide whether or not to bring an umbrella. They know there's a 75% chance that it will rain (thanks AccuWeather). If they don't bring an umbrella and it rains they receive a payoff of -7. If they do bring an umbrella and it rains, they receive a payoff of -4. If it doesn't rain, but they bring an umbrella they receive a payoff of -2. Finally, if it doesn't rain and they don't bring an umbrella they receive a payoff of 2. Player 1 learns the weather before they leave the house, but player 2 does not. Player 2 can, however, observe player 1s choice. (a) Represent this game in the extensive form. i. Use backwards induction to solve for the Nash equilibrium (b) Represent this game in the normal form i. Solve for the Nash equilibrium (c) Are the equilibrium strategy profiles the same in a) and b)? Explain why or why not.arrow_forward1. Players 1 and 2 must decide whether or not to carry an umbrella when leaving home. They know that there is a 50-50 chance of rain. Each player's payoff is -5 if he does not carry an umbrella and it rains, -2 if he carries an umbrella and it rains, −1 if he carries an umbrella and is sunny, and 1 if he doesn't carry an umbrella and it is sunny. Player 1 learns the weather before leaving home; player 2 does not, but he can observe player 1's action before choosing his own. Give the extensive and strategic forms of the game and find its Nash equilibria. Is it dominance solvable?arrow_forwardPlayer 2 Y1 Y2 Y3 X1 1,4 8,4 7,4 6,2 4,5 Player 1 X2 3,5 3,5 X3 5,3 2,2arrow_forward
- Phil, Stu, and Doug are deciding which fraternity to pledge. They all assign a payoff of 5 to pledging Phi Gamma and a payoff of 4 to Delta Chi. The payoff from not pledging either house is 1. Phi Gamma and Delta Chi each have two slots. If all three of them happen to choose the same house, then the house will randomly choose which two are admitted. In that case, each has probability 2/3 of getting in and probability 1/3 of not pledging any house. If they do not all choose the same house, then all are admitted to the house they chose. Find a symmetric Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies.arrow_forwardConsider two firms who are engaged in a Research and Development (R&D) "con- test". Both firms simultaneously expend resources to try to win the contest (which may mean developing a superior product or developing a product before the com- petitor). If the two firms expend bị and b2, respectively, on R&D, the probability that firm 1 wins the contest is if b1 = b2 =0 BE otherwise P1(b1, b2) = where r is some exogenous constant, r E (0, 0). If firm 1 wins the contest, it will subsequently earn revenue of 1 (not including the cost of R&D, b1). If firm 1 loses the contest, it will earn zero revenue, and thus lose bj in total. Hence, firm l's expected profit is n'(b1,b2) = p1(b1,b2) - b1. Everything is symmetric for firm 2. i. How does p1(b1,0) depend on b1? Is it an equilibrium for both firms to spend nothing on R&D (b1 = b2 = 0)? Prove and explain your answer. For which values of r is n' (b,b2) concave in b1 when b2 > 0? ii. Consider the possibility of a symmetric pure-strategy…arrow_forwardProfessor can give a TA scholarship for a maximum of 2 years. At the beginning of each year professor Hahn decides whether he will give a scholarship to Gong Yi or not. Gong Yi can get a scholarship in t=2, only if he gets it in t=1. Basically, the professor and TA will play the following game twice. TA can be a Hardworking type with probably 0.3 and can be a Lazy type with a probability of 0.7. Professor does not know TA's type. If TA is hard working, it will be X=5 and TA will always work if he gets a scholarship. If TA is lazy, it will be X= 1. There is no time discount for t=2. Find out a Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium of the game.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
