Player 1 and Player 2 will play one round of the Rock-Paper-Scissors game. The winner receives a payoff +1, the loser receives a payoff -1. If it is a tie, then each player receives a payoff of zero. Suppose Player 2 is using a non-optimal strategy: he/she plays Rock with probability 35%; Paper with probability 45%; and Scissors with probability 20%. Given that Player 1 knows Player 2 is using this strategy, the best response of Player 1 is to play O a mixed strategy with probability 1/3 each (Rock, Paper and Scissors) O Scissors with probability 100% O any strategy (any strategy is a best response for Player 1) O Rock with probability 100% O Paper with probability 100%

Player 1 and Player 2 will play one round of the Rock-Paper-Scissors game. The winner receives a payoff +1, the loser receives a payoff -1. If it is a tie, then each player receives a payoff of zero. Suppose Player 2 is using a non-optimal strategy: he/she plays Rock with probability 35%; Paper with probability 45%; and Scissors with probability 20%. Given that Player 1 knows Player 2 is using this strategy, the best response of Player 1 is to play O a mixed strategy with probability 1/3 each (Rock, Paper and Scissors) O Scissors with probability 100% O any strategy (any strategy is a best response for Player 1) O Rock with probability 100% O Paper with probability 100%

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

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…
Here is a Bayesian BOS game. Man has a special preference t1 on boxing while woman has a special preference t2 on opera. Both are in [0,2]. The preference information is private. i.e. Each knows his (her) own preference but does not know the other's preference. The below is the payoff. M/W Boxing Opera Воxing 3+t1,1 0,0 Opera 0,0 1,3+t2 We are checking whether the below strategy profile is a Bayesian Nash Equilibrium. "Man chooses boxing if t1>p while woman chooses opera if t2>g." 1) Given t1, man will choose boxing if t1> /g- 2) Given t2, woman will choose opera if t2> /p- 4) By shoving the simultaneous equations, we get p=q=sqrt(6)-
Once again, two ice cream truck vendors, A and B, are playing a simultaneous pricing game. If only one of the vendors prices low, he gets all the customers for a payoff of 12, while the other vendor gets no customers and a payoff of zero. If both vendors price high, they each get a payoff of 6. If both price low, they each get a payoff of 5. Suppose that the above game is repeated indefinitely, and together the vendors adopt a trigger strategy such that they would start charging the low price only if the other vendor charged a low price last time. Provided that the vendors stick to their new strategy, what would be the Nash equilibrium going forward? a) Both the vendors price high b) Both the vendors price low c) Vendor A prices high, vendor B prices low d) Vendor B prices high, vendor A prices low
Olivia is thinking about opening a new bakery (the entrant). There is already a bakery open in her neighborhood (the incumbent), and the owner of the incumbent bakery makes it clear that if Olivia enters the market, they will cut their prices in an attempt to drive the new bakery out of business. Based on the payoff matrix below, is the incumbent’s threat credible? That is, if Olivia opens a new bakery, will the incumbent actually lower their prices? Note: the entrant chooses the row, the incumbent chooses the column High price Low price Enter 1, 2 -1, 1 Don’t enter 0, 10 0, 1 a. Yes, the threat is credible b. No, the threat is not credible
Please help with #1
Please help with #2