Consider the version of the Beauty Contest game fromthe class, in which the players are trying to guess the average guess minus one. Moreprecisely, the utilities now are:ui (si; sj ) = -|si-(-1)|where sj/#l forj belong tI(a) Which strategies are strictly dominated in this game, and by which alternativestrategies? And so, what is the set of strategies BR11(b) What is the set BR21 ? What is the set BRni for any n > 0?

Players in the beauty contest game must guess a number in order to maximize their scoring. The…

Consider the version of the Beauty Contest game from the class, in which the players are trying to guess the average guess minus one. More precisely, the utilities now are: ui (si; sj) = -si-(-1)| where sj/#1 for j belong tl (a) Which strategies are strictly dominated in this game, and by which alternative strategies? And so, what is the set of strategies BR1i (b) What is the set BR2i? What is the set BRni for any n > 0?

Consider the version of the Beauty Contest game from the class, in which the players are trying to guess the average guess minus one. More precisely, the utilities now are: ui (si; sj) = -si-(-1)| where sj/#1 for j belong tl (a) Which strategies are strictly dominated in this game, and by which alternative strategies? And so, what is the set of strategies BR1i (b) What is the set BR2i? What is the set BRni for any n > 0?

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

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.
Consider the following two-player game with three options for each player. (Payouts are listed for the row player first, then the column player.) player Y layery 3,3 A 1,5 4,4 6,2 K 8,1 3,7 5,2 0,6 1,1 Find a mixed Nash equilibrium for this game. Solution suggestion: Use two variables per player. If p and are the probabilities of selecting the first two strategies, then 1-p-q is the probability of selecting the third strategy. You will need to solve a system of equations.
Consider the two period Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma Game where each player is interested in the SUM of the payoffs she gets in each period. Players see the outcome after the play in each period. (The period payoffs are 10,5,1,0.) (i) Write out this game in its strategic form. (ii) Find all Nash equilibria and all Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibria.
Player 1 Cooperate (C) Defect (D) If the game has a dominant strategy, what is it? There is none. If the game has a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies, what is it? There is none. Cooperate (C) 3,3 8,0 Cooperate (C) is a dominant strategy for both players. Defect (D) is a dominant strategy for both players. Cooperate (C) is a dominant strategy for 1, and Defect (D) is a dominant strategy for 2. C, C is the only Nash equilibrium. D, D is the only Nash equilibrium. C, C and D, D are both Nash equilibria. Player 2 Defect (D) 0,8 1,1
In 'the dictator' game, one player (the dictator) chooses how to divide a pot of $10 between herself and another player (the recipient). The recipient does not have an opportunity to reject the proposed distribution. As such, if the dictator only cares about how much money she makes, she should keep all $10 for herself and give the recipient nothing. However, when economists conduct experiments with the dictator game, they find that dictators often offer strictly positive amounts to the recipients. Are dictators behaving irrationally in these experiments? Whether you think they are or not, your response should try to provide an explanation for the behavior.
2. For the following payoff matrix find all of the mixed strategy Nash equilibria (check for dominated strategies to eliminate). Player 1 X Y Z A 1,3 4,1 2,3 Player 2 B 2,4 3,1 0,0 C 2,3 5,0 4,2
Problem 2. Consider the partnership-game we discussed in Lecture 3 (pages 81-87 of the textbook). Now change the setup of the game so that player 1 chooses x = [0, 4], and after observing the choice of x, player 2 chooses y ≤ [0, 4]. The payoffs are the same as before. (a) Find all SPNE (subgame perfect Nash equilibria) in pure strategies. (b) Can you find a Nash equilibrium, with player 1 choosing x = 1, that is not subgame perfect? Explain.
Player 1 Cooperate (C) Defect (D) Cooperate (C) 3,3 8,0 Player 2 Defect (D) 0,8 1,1 In general, a combination of strategies is a Nash equilibrium if ... Every player is choosing a best response against the other players' strategies. Every player has a positive payoff. The players maximize the sum of their payoffs. The players choose identical strategies. If the game is repeated, which cooperative actions could benefit both players? O Both players choose C. Player 1 chooses C, Player 2 chooses D. O Player 1 chooses D, Player 2 chooses C. Both players choose D.
Consider the payoff matrix below, which describes a symmetric A B A 17,17 0,14 B 14,0 8,8 (a) Find all Nash equilibria of this game, including any mixed strategy equilibria. (b) Draw the expected payoff difference diagram for this game, including all the Nash equilibria you found in (a). is (c) What would you expect to occur most frequently when this game played as a lab experiment? Justify your answer using your answers from (a) and (b).
NE 2). Consider the following extensive form game between two players. (1,10) u D 1 B X (a) List all pure strategies of player 2. (b) Represent this game in normal form. (c) Find all pure-strategy Nash equilibria of this game. (d) Find all SPNE (in pure strategies) of this game. (6,3) (4,2) (5,1)
1. Consider the following normal form game. X Y (a) What is the set of rationalizable strategies for this game? Player 1 Player 2 W Q 1,7 1,5 2,3 Z 3,4 0,4 0,6 R= (b) The game has only one Nash equilibrium and it is a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium. Compute and report this equilibrium. Equil. strategy profile:
1.a) If the three executives of a fraudulent organization report nothing to the authorities, each gets a payoff of 100. If at least one of them blows the whistle, then those who reported the fraud get 28, while those who didn’t get -100. Suppose they play a symmetric mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium where each is silent (does not report fraud) with probability p. What is p?A, 0.1B, 0.28C, 0.5D, 0.8 b) In a two-player game, with strategies and (some known and some unknown) payoffs as shown below, suppose a mixed-strategy equilibrium exists where 1 plays C with probability 3/4, and Player 2 randomizes over X, Y, and Z with equal probabilities. What are the pure-strategy equilibria of this game? A, (A, Y) and (B, X)B, (A, Z) and (C, Y)C, (B, X) and (C, X)D, (C, X) and (C, Y)