Firm 1 Silence Disclosure Silence -200, -200 0,-590 Firm 2 Disclosure -590, 0 -450, 450 fine (a hundred million won) 1. Where is the Nash Equilibrium? - find out the dominant strategy O a. (Silence, Silence) = (-200, -200) O b. (Silence, Disclosure) = (-590, 0) c. (Disclosure, Silence) = (0, -590) d. (Disclosure, Disclosure) = (-450, -450)

Firm 1 Silence Disclosure Silence -200, -200 0,-590 Firm 2 Disclosure -590, 0 -450, 450 fine (a hundred million won) 1. Where is the Nash Equilibrium? - find out the dominant strategy O a. (Silence, Silence) = (-200, -200) O b. (Silence, Disclosure) = (-590, 0) c. (Disclosure, Silence) = (0, -590) d. (Disclosure, Disclosure) = (-450, -450)

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

Consider the game having the following normal form. Which of the following strategies of the row player is a dominant strategy? COLUMN PLAYER A B 6, 5 -5, 11 7,9 ROW PLAYER Y 10, 6 7, 10 11, 9 11, 7 -4, 11 8, 4 W 11, 3 -1, 10 7,8 O W Y. Z. No dominant strategy
age Which of the following statements is the best description of a Nash equilibrium? Select one: O a. An equilibrium outcome achieved by cooperation between players in the game b. An outcome that is achieved when players in the game have jointly maximized profits and divided those profits according to market share of each player O c. An outcome where each player's strategy depends on the behaviour of its opponents d. An outcome where each player's best strategy is to maintain its present behaviour given the present behaviour of the other players Next page
3. Nash Equilibria Consider the following (normal-form) game. Compute a Nash Equilibrium of this game. U C D L | M R 5,0 1,3 4,0 2,4 1,4 3,5 0,1 1,0 5,0
(1) HINO (a) (b) (c) F Consider the following signalling game. H w =0, Pr = 1/ ogled MINT Nature 3 w = 1, Pr = 1/ H HINO C 고 F HINO Is this a cheap-talk game? Why or why not? Show that the following is a pooling perfect Bayes-Nash equilibrium: C plays H irrespective of the value of w; and F plays I with probability irrespective of C's action. What posteriors are needed for this to be a perfect Bayes-Nash equilibrium? Find a separating perfect Bayes-Nash equilibrium.
1. Consider the following game matrix. Player A Answer: Top Bottom Left a, b e, f Player B Right c, d g, h (a) If top and left are strictly dominant strategies, then what do we know the relationship of the parameters? (b) If (top, left) is a Nash equilibrium, then what do we know the relationship of the parameters? Answer: (c) If top and left are strictly dominant strategies, will (top, left) be a Nash equilibrium? Why? Answer: (d) If (top, left) is a Nash equilibrium, must the strategies be strictly dominant strategies? Why? Answer:
1. The table below shows a prisoner's dilemma in normal form. Players 1 and 2 each choose between D and C. D C D 2,2 1,10 10, 1 5,5 Answer the following questions. Remember to explain your reasoning. (a) If the game is played only once, what is the equilibrium in dominant strategies? (b) If the game is played three times in a row, what action does each player choose in every round? Suppose that the game is repeated indefinitely. The players do not discount the future. How- ever, the game ends with probability p € (0, 1) after each round. Assume that each player uses the following grim-trigger strategy. Each player chooses C in the first round. Each player chooses C in the current round if both players chose C in every previous round. Each player chooses D in the current round if either player chose D in some previous round. (c) If p = 1, is it optimal for each player to use the grim-trigger strategy above given that the other player uses the grim-trigger strategy above? [Hint: compare…
UofC Aggressive Restrained Aggressive 18, 26 29,47 MRU Restrained 45, 59 32, 23 Consider the case of a Sequential-Move game. Uofc moves First Part 1. Is UofC 's sub-game Perfect Nash Equilibrium strategy Aggressive or Restrained? (Answer 1 for aggressive and 2 for Restrained) 1 Part 2. Is MRU's sub-game Perfect Nash Equilibrium strategy Aggressive or Restrained? (Answer 1 for aggressive and 2 for Restrained) Number: Part 3. How much profit does UofC make under the Sub-game perfect Nash-Equilibrium? Number Part 4. How much profit does MRU make under the Sub-game perfect Nash-Equilibrium? Number
Consider the game R T 11 1.0 10 M 014.0 0.1 B 0.10. 4.0 (a) Find the Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. (b) Find the Nash equilibrium in completely mixed strategies. (c) Find the Nash equilibrium in partially mixed strategies ove the support {A. B} x {C.R).
20) Given the payoff matrix in the figure, the Nash equilibrium outcome of this game is for: Ajinomoto Produce 30 Produce 40 million pounds million pounds Ajinomoto makes $180 million Ajinomoto makes $200 million Produce 30 million ADM makes $180 million ADM makes $150 million pounds Ajinomoto makes $150 million Ajinomoto makes $160 million Produce 40 million ADM makes $200 million ADM makes $160 million pounds O A. each firm to produce 30 million pounds. B. each firm to produce 40 million pounds. C. ADM to produce 30 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 40 million pounds. D. ADM to produce 40 million pounds and for Ajinomoto to produce 30 million pounds. ADM
1. Static and Dynamic Game. Consider the following 2-by-2 game: C D 1A (1,10) (1,1) B (2, a) (0,1) (a) erwise, find the pure-strategy Nash equilibria, if any of this game. (There is no need to look for equilibria in mixed strategies) Assume for now that a = 2. Using dominant strategies or oth- (b) Now, consider the dynamic game in which player 1 moves before player 2, and the payoffs remain unchanged. i.: possible strategies for each player? Recall that a strategy profile for a player not at the initial node of the game tree must specify an action for the player at every node. Draw the game tree for this dynamic game. What are the ii "Find the backward-induction solution(s) to this game. Calculate the equilibrium payoffs for each player. Com- pared to the simultaneous game, is there a first-mover advantage or a ii. second-mover advantage? (c) Now, assume that a = 0 in the original static game. i. Find all the Nash equilibria in pure and mixed strategies. Denoting p the probability…
5. In the lecture, we have shown the following: Theorem: Suppose strategy s, (in a finite game) is strictly dominated by strat- egy ŝ; when opponents are restricted to using pure strategies. That is, Then strategy s, will never be in the support of a best response. That is, for all 0-i, o; € BR;(0-;) =0;(s') = 0. (a) Use this result to find all the Nash equilibria (including mixed strategy ones) of the following game. player 2 R T 10,5 4,1 м 6,1 8,8 5,0 0,10 player 1 В
3. Consider the following game: K Out 2 2 1 9 Player 1 Player 1 X In A Y Player 2 0 2 B 5 5 a) Does the game have perfect information? Why/why not? b) Circle the subgames. c) Find all backward induction solutions. d) Below are written five strategy profiles. One of them is a subgame perfect equilibrium; circle it! One of them is not a Nash equilibrium; write "X" across it! ((Out, X), A) ((Out, Y), A) ((In, Y),B) ((Out, Y), B) ((In, X),B)