Consider the extensive game with 3 players from before. Assume that all players have the exact same payoff. This is determined primarily by the action chosen by player 3. Players are better off the later in the alphabet that player 3's action is. For instance, they are better off if player 3's action is H than F and better off if the action is F than E. If player 3's action is F, players are better off when player 2 pick D than C. The same is true if player 3's action is E. Use backwards induction to solve the game. Which of the following strategy profiles is the solution? (B,D,J) (B,DD,FFHJ) (B,CD,EFGJ) None of the above

Consider the extensive game with 3 players from before. Assume that all players have the exact same payoff. This is determined primarily by the action chosen by player 3. Players are better off the later in the alphabet that player 3's action is. For instance, they are better off if player 3's action is H than F and better off if the action is F than E. If player 3's action is F, players are better off when player 2 pick D than C. The same is true if player 3's action is E. Use backwards induction to solve the game. Which of the following strategy profiles is the solution? (B,D,J) (B,DD,FFHJ) (B,CD,EFGJ) None of the above

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Mohamed and Kate each pick an integer number between 1 and 3 (inclusive). They make their choices sequentially.Mohamed is the first player and Kate the second player. If they pick the same number each receives a payoff equal to the number they named. If they pick a different number, they get nothing. What is the SPE of the game? a. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate is indifferent between 1, 2 and 3. b. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate chooses 1 if Mohamed chooses 1, 2 if Mohamed chooses 2, and 3 if Mohamed chooses 3. c. Mohamed chooses 1 and Kate chooses 1 if Mohamed chooses 1, 2 if Mohamed chooses 2 and 3 if Mohamed chooses 3. d. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate chooses 3.
Cameron and Luke are playing a game called ”Race to 10”. Cameron goes first, and the players take turns choosing either 1 or 2. In each turn, they add the new number to a running total. The player who brings the total to exactly 10 wins the game. a) If both Cameron and Luke play optimally, who will win the game? Does the game have a first-mover advantage or a second-mover advantage? b) Suppose the game is modified to ”Race to 11” (i.e, the player who reaches 11 first wins). Who will win the game if both players play their optimal strategies? What if the game is ”Race to 12”? Does the result change? c) Consider the general version of the game called ”Race to n,” where n is a positive integer greater than 0. What are the conditions on n such that the game has a first mover advantage? What are the conditions on n such that the game has a second mover advantage?
In this version of the ultimatum game experiment, one participant is given £100, and is told to offer to split that amount with another participant. The second player can either refuse to accept the division, in which case the participant receiving the £100 has to give it back, or can accept the division, in which case, the player receiving the money splits the £100 as proposed. For the participant who has to accept or reject the offer A) The best strategy is to accept any offer which meets the social norm for fairness. B) The best strategy is to threaten to turn down any transfer of less than £100 to ensure that the person receiving the money makes a fair offer. C) There is a dominant strategy to accept any offer because gaining some money is better than gaining no money D) There is a dominant strategy to turn down any offer other than £50 because an unequal split would be unfair.
A crime is witnessed by 3 citizens. Every citizen would like the police to be informed about the crime, but prefers that someone else reports it (filing a report is a hassle). Each of the three citizens chooses simultaneously (and independently) whether to call the police or not. When no one makes a call, every citizen receives payoff 0. If at least one citizen calls the police, citizens who call get payoff 5, and those who don't call get payoff 9. (a) Find all Nash equilibria in pure strategies. (b) Compute a symmetric Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies (i.e., an equilibrium in which every citizen calls with the same probability p E (0, 1)). (c) Does the game have a Nash equilibrium in pure or mixed strategies different from those you identified in (a) and (b)? If yes, construct one. If not, argue why not.
Person A can trust or not trust person B. If person A decides to not trust, both players get a zero payoff. If Person A trusts, Person B can abuse or honour the trust bestowed upon them. If person B abuses Person A's trust, Person A gets a negative payoff. If person B honours person A's trust, person A gets a positive payoff. Person B can be of two types: trustworthy or not trustworthy. Both trustworthy and untrustworthy person B types get a positive payoff if they honour A's trust. But a trustworthy person B prefers to honour person A's trust whereas an untrustworthy B prefers to abuse. 2 Nature determines randomly if person B is trustworthy or not. Person B knows if they are trustworthy or not but person A doesn't know. The probability that person B is not trustworthy is a and the probability that person B is trustworthy is 1 a. a is common knowledge, meaning that both person A and person B know the probability of person B being (not) trustworthy. a) Draw the extensive game version…
Consider the following game played by four individuals, players 1, 2, 3, and 4. Each individual has $10,000. Each player can donate between $0 and $10,000 to build a public park that costs $20,000. If they collect enough money, they construct the park, which is worth $9,000 to each of them. However, if they collect less than $20,000, they cannot build a park. Furthermore, regardless of whether the park is built or not, individuals lose any donations that they make. a) Describe the Nash equilibria for a simultaneous game. What makes them equilibria? Hint: There are many equilibria, so you may want to use a mathematical expression! b) Suppose that players 1, 2, and 3, each donate $4,000 for the park. How much will player 4 donate and why. What are the resulting payoffs for the players? c) Suppose instead that player 1 donated first, player 2 second, player 3 third, and player 4 last. Furthermore, players could only donate in intervals of 1,000 (0, $1,000, $2,000, etc.). How much will…
There are three players who must each choose an “effort” level from 1 to 7, that is, Si = {1, 2, 3, ..., 7}. The payoff for each player i is ui(si, s−i) = 10 max{s1, s2, s3} − si. How many pure- strategy Nash equilibria are there? Select one: a.2 b.4 c.none of the other answers d.3 e.1
For various values of X(for player1 and player 2), find all Nash equilibria of the following game with von Neumann-Morgenstern preferences:
Consider the following game. You will roll a fair, 6-sided die either once or twice. You decide whether to do the second roll after you see how the first one lands. The payoff is $n, where n is the outcome of the last roll. For example, if the first roll lands 4 and the second lands 2, you win $2. If you only do one roll and it lands 4, you win $4. Suppose you make your decision about whether to go for a second roll based on expected monetary value. Then you will go for a second roll if (and only if) the first roll lands x or lower. What is x?
- Individuals 1 and 2 are forming a company. The value of their relationship depends on the effort that each expends. Suppose that individual i's utility from the relationship is x² + x; − xixj, where x¿ is individual i 's effort and x ; is the effort of the other person (i = 1, 2). Assume x1, x2 ≥ 0. Which statement is true? There is a Nash equilibrium in which each player chooses effort level k > 0. This equilibrium is Pareto efficient. There is no mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium. There is a unique Nash equilibrium in which each player chooses no effort x¿ = x; = 0. The set of Nash equilibria in this game is finite. There is a Nash equilibrium in which xi = 0 and x ; = 1| =
If the players play pure strategies, the game has no Nash equilibrium. But what if they choose their moves randomly? Let each player instead opt for a mixed strategy instead of a pure strategy. The first will play action Z with probability p, and the second will play action L with probability q. At which pair (p, q) are the mixed strategies of the players in equilibrium? At which pair (p, q) does neither player want to change strategy? When are both strategies simultaneously the best response?
Not multiple questions