Question D2. An Aggressor country is threatening to attack another victim country. The victim countryhas allies who will come to their defence if they are attacked, however, the amount of troops the allysends can be either small or large. The victim knows how many troops will be sent but the aggressordoes not, the aggressor believes the probability the force is large is p. The game faced by the countriesis depicted below.Victim "Large force"DefendCapitulateAggressorAttack(-50,-20)(100,-50)Don't Attack(0,-10)(0,0)Victim "Small force"DefendCapitulateAggressorAttack(50,-80)(100,-50)Don't Attack(0,-10)(0,0)a) Define what it means for a game to have incomplete information and explain how a game withunknown payoffs can be thought of as such a game.b) Write down a combined payoff matrix that includes strategies for the victim that are conditionalon their type and use this to work out the Bayesian-Nash Equilibria for this game.

When players lack complete knowledge of critical elements, such as the payoffs or types of their…

Question D2. An Aggressor country is threatening to attack another victim country. The victim country has allies who will come to their defence if they are attacked, however, the amount of troops the ally sends can be either small or large. The victim knows how many troops will be sent but the aggressor does not, the aggressor believes the probability the force is large is p. The game faced by the countries is depicted below. Victim "Large force"

Question D2. An Aggressor country is threatening to attack another victim country. The victim country has allies who will come to their defence if they are attacked, however, the amount of troops the ally sends can be either small or large. The victim knows how many troops will be sent but the aggressor does not, the aggressor believes the probability the force is large is p. The game faced by the countries is depicted below. Victim "Large force"

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

Describe the game and find all Nash equilibria in the following situation: Each of two players chooses a non-negative number. In the choice (a1, a2), the payoff of the first player is equal to a1(a2 - a1), and the payoff of the second player is equal to a2(1 – a1 – a2).
A buyer and seller trade with each other for an infinite number of periods. Both parties have a discount factor of d, where 0 < d < 1. In each period both parties can play trust (T) or to play selfish (S). If both the buyer and seller play T the payoffs are 4 to each player. If both parties plays the payoffs are 3 to each player. If one player plays S and the other T, the payoffs are 6 to the player who opted for 5 and 1 to the party that opted for T. Consider the following trigger strategy. In the first period play T. In any subsequent period, play T if in every previous period the outcome was (T, T), if not play S. What is the minimum d required for this trigger strategy to be subgame perfect equilibrium? O None of the other answers are correct. O 1/4 O 1/3 O 3/4
Answer to the image?
Explain Clearly.
Jane is interested in buying a car from a used car dealer. Her maximum willingness to pay for thecar is 12 ($12,000). Bo, the dealer, is willing to sell the car as long as he receives at least 9($9,000). What is the Nash bargaining solution to this game?
Note: The answer should be typed.
A and B are a couple and they want to go into a concert. A comes from Bonn and loves the music of Ludwig van Beethoven. B comes from Salzburg and loves the music of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. There are two concerts in town: one with the music of Beethoven and one with the music of Mozart. Both (A and B) prefer to go to a concert together. If both go to a concert of Beethoven, A has a pay-off of 4 and B has a pay-off of 2. If both go to a concert of Mozart, B has a pay-off of 4 and A has a pay-off of 2. If A goes to a concert of Mozart and B to a concert of Beethoven, they are both miserable and get a pay-off of 0. But, if B goes to a concert of Mozart and A to a concert of Beethoven, they are both a little better off with a pay-off of 1. Both A and B have to make a simultaneous decision and cannot communicate prior to the decision. (a) Construct the pay-off matrix for this game. (b) Identify the Nash equilibrium or equilibria of the game. (c) Which off the allocations are…
Mixed Nash Equilibrium Player 2 C D A 5,1 1,3 B 2,6 4,2 PLAYER 1 a) calculate the probability In equilibrium Player 1 chooses A with probability a= [?] and player 2 chooses M with probability B = [ ?] b) calculate payoff for mixed strategy nash equilibrium Player 1 gets payoff of [?] Player 2 gets payoff of [?] c) Suppose the payoff for (B,C) would change to (0,8) Would probability a increase,decrease, stay the same? Would probability B increase,decrease, stay the same?
Suppose 2 players play the following game infinite times in the future. What should be the minimum value of the time discount so that the equilibrium strategy is (Cooperate, Cooperate)? Player 2 Player 1 Cooperate Defect Cooperate (10, 10) Defect (2, 12) (4,4) (12, 2)
None
= a) Suppose x 4 and y = 3. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 1? b) Suppose x = 4 and y = 3. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 2? c) Suppose x = 4 and y = 3. What is the sum of both players' payoffs in all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game? d) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 1? e) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. After all strategies that are dominated by a pure strategy are iteratively deleted for both players, how many strategies remain for Player 2? f) Suppose x = 4 and y = 11. What is the sum of both players' payoffs in all pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game?