Answered: Consider the following 3-player public… | bartleby

Microeconomic Theory

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.7P

See similar textbooks

Related questions

Question

Suppose that each player i is only concerned about his own material payoffs with u_i(x_i) = x_i. Derive the Nash equilibrium of the game.

Consider the following 3-player public goods game. Players 1, 2, and 3 have the same initial
endowment y and simultaneously choose to contribute to a public good. If player 1 contributes
C1, player 2 contributes c2, and player 3 contributes c3, then player i's monetary payoff is
xi (C1, C2, C3) = y − ci+m × (c1 + C2 + C3)
where 3 <m< 1.

Expert Solution

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Blurred answer

Similar questions

suppose that the world is comprised of two countries: X and Y. Because of the absence of centralized world governance, the control of global externalities is particularly challenging, which is the case with greenhouse gases linked to climate change. The entries in the following Payoff Table describe each country's well-being under different abatement patterns: X\Y No Abate Abate No Abate 12,12 24,8 Abate 8,24 20,20 Now suppose that the game is repeated indefinitely. Define the concepts of Trigger Strategies and also the concept of Business as Usual Strategies for the repeated game. Verify that trigger strategies supporting cooperative payoffs (20,20) constitute a non-cooperative equilibrium of the repeated game when δ=0.8. Are trigger strategies still an equilibrium when δ=0.30? Explain intuitively why and verify that Business as Usual still is an equilibrium in this case.
THE PRISONERS' DILEMMA Consider the following simple model of a cocktail party. Alice and Bob are carrying on separate conversations at the party. Alice speaks at volume a and Bob speaks at volume b. The communication benefit to Alice is al(a + b) and the benefit to Bob is b/(a + b). The vocal-strain cost to Alice is ca and the cost to Bob is cb, where c is a parameter. Suppose that the players have two choices: speaking softly at volume 1, or speaking loudly at volume 4. This leads to the following game in strategic form, with Alice choosing the row and Bob choosing the column. a = 1 a = 4 b = 1 0.5-c, 0.5-c 0.8-4c, 0.2-c 0.0400 0.0500 0.0750 0.0800 0.1500 b = 4 0.2 c, 0.8-4c - 0.54c, 0.5-4c For which of the following values of c is this game a prisoners' dilemma? (Mark all values for which this is true.)
Consider a 3-player public good game where each individual has an endowment of 60 tokens and the public good’s MPCR (marginal per capita return) is 20%. Write down one player’s payoff as a function of g, which represents their contribution, and G, which represents the total contributions made by all players. If you are one of the players, and the other two players each contribute 20 tokens, how many tokens should you contribute to maximize your payoff? 0,20,40, or 60 tokens
Describe an original social dilemma you observe in the real world -- i.e. a situation in which no one has an incentive to change what they're doing, but everyone would be better off if everyone changed what they were doing. Try to create two tables to present your dilemma as a 2×2 game. Your first table should be descriptive, Your second table should be a payoff matrix showing the payoffs for both players in each of the four situations Using your payoff matrix, describe the Nash equilibrium and the mutually preferred outcome.
Splitting Pizza: You and a friend are in an Italian restaurant, and the owner offers both of you a free eight-slice pizza under the following condition. Each of you must simultaneously announce how many slices you would like; that is, each player i ∈ 1, 2 names his desired amount of pizza, 0 ≤ si ≤ 8. If s1 + s2 ≤ 8 then the players get their demands (and the owner eats any leftover slices). If s1 + s2 > 8, then the players get nothing. Assume that you each care only about how much pizza you individually consume, and the more the better.What outcomes can be supported as pure-strategy Nash equilibria?
This is a two-player, simultaneous one-move game represented as a game table (normal form).a) What is the pure strategy Nash equilibrium outcome if there is one? b) Is this a socially optimal outcome? If not, which outcome is preferred? c) Do all three solution approaches for simultaneous games work independently (not together)? If not, which do not? d) Draw the game as a game tree (extensive form). e) Switch the payoffs in cells (A, A) and (D, D). What is the pure strategy Nash equilibrium outcome if there is one?
5) Suppose that the letter grade earned on a test for each student in a class depends upon how well he/she does relative to other students in the class. This exhibit shows a prisoner’s dilemma setting for two representative students in the class, George and Gina. What is the expected final Nash Equilibrium? a) Study 4 hours for both Gina and George. b) Study 2 hours for both Gina and George. c) George studies for 2 hours, and Gina studies for 4 hours. d) George studies for 4 hours, and Gina studies for 2 hours.
Again consider an extension of the Stag Hunt game. There are N = 3 hunters. This time each hunter has multiple effort levels in hunting for stag. Specifically, assume each hunter i can choose effort level ei = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. Given a strategy profile (e1, e2, e3), each player i 0 s payoff = 2 min{e1, e2, e3} − ei . In words, payoff equals twice of the least effort level of everyone subtract player i’s own effort level. For example, if player 3 chooses e3 = 1, players 1 and 2 both choose effort level 4 then the minimum effort level min{e1, e2, e3} = 1, so player 3’s payoff equals 2 × 1 − e3 = 1 and players 1 and 2 each gets payoff 2 × 1 − 4 = −2. a. Is a strategy profile in which all players choose the same effort level a Nash equilibrium? Explain. (Consider what a player’s payoff is given this profile and what payoff he could get by increasing or decreasing his effort.) b. Is any profile in which not all effort levels are equal a Nash equilibrium? Explain.
Part 3: Environmental Regulation & Economic Incentives Consider the following two variations of the payoff matrix for the environmental “game" shown in Figure 11-7 (and projected in class on Friday, November 13); note that each number in the cell represents total net domestic welfare for each country. VERSION 1: Regulate Foreign Don't regulate 70 50 Regulate 70 70 Home 70 50 Don't regulate 50 50 VERSION 2: Regulate Foreign Don't regulate 80 100 Regulate 80 Home 50 70 Don't regulate 100 70 50
Table 9-03. Suppose you are a general in the army. Your country is at war. You are trying to invade the enemy. You can attack on the enemys east coast or the west coast. The enemy has only enough troops to defend one coast. The payoff matrix below represents whether you or the enemy wins (represented by 1) or loses (represented by 0). Enemy Defend east coast Defend west coast Enemy: 1 Enemy: 0 Attack east coast You: 0 You: 1 You Enemy: 0 Enemy: 1 Attack west coast You: 1 You: 0 Refer to Table 9-03. To win the war, O a. you must attack the west coast, only if you have credible information that the enemy is defending the east coast. O b. you must attack the west coast, and information about whether the enemy is defending the east or the west coast is irrelevant to you. c. you must attack the west coast, only if you have credible information that the enemy is defending the west coast. d. you must never attack the west coast, and information about whether the enemy is defending the east or…
For the operating system game, let us assume Windows is more superior than Mac intrinsically and that network effects are stronger for Macs. These modifications are reflected in different payoffs. Now, the payoffs from adopting Windows is 30 + 10 × w and from adopting Mac is 20 × m. n consumers are simultaneously deciding between Windows and Mac, where n > 10. (a) Is there a Nash equilibrium in which everyone buys Windows? Explain your answer. (b) Is there a Nash equilibrium in which everyone buys Mac? Explain your answer. (c) Is there a Nash equilibrium in which some consumers buy Windows and some consumers buy Mac? Explain your answer.
12.....QUESTION.....

SEE MORE QUESTIONS

Recommended textbooks for you

Microeconomic Theory

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

Microeconomic Theory

Microeconomic Theory

Economics

ISBN:

9781337517942

Author:

NICHOLSON

Publisher:

Cengage

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS