Two people are involved in a dispute. Person 1 does not know whether person 2 is strong or weak; she assigns probability a to person 2's being strong. Person 2 is fully informed. Each person can either fight or yield. Each person's preferences are represented by the expected value of a Bernoulli payoff function that assigns the payoff of 0 if she yields (regardless of the other person's action) and a payoff of 1 if she fights and her opponent yields; if both people fight then their payoffs are (-1, 1) if person 2 is strong and (1, -1) if person 2 is weak. Formulate this situation as a Bayesian game and find its Nash equilibria if a < 1/2 and if a > 1/2. "

Two people are involved in a dispute. Person 1 does not know whether person 2 is strong or weak; she assigns probability a to person 2's being strong. Person 2 is fully informed. Each person can either fight or yield. Each person's preferences are represented by the expected value of a Bernoulli payoff function that assigns the payoff of 0 if she yields (regardless of the other person's action) and a payoff of 1 if she fights and her opponent yields; if both people fight then their payoffs are (-1, 1) if person 2 is strong and (1, -1) if person 2 is weak. Formulate this situation as a Bayesian game and find its Nash equilibria if a < 1/2 and if a > 1/2. "

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…
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
Suppose that Alex and Bob complete the project sequentially. Assume that Alex decides his effort level and starts the project first, and then Bob decides his effort level and finishes the project. Present the extensive-form representation of the game (i.e., draw a decision tree which is also referred as the game tree). What is your prediction regarding the outcome of the game? Explain your prediction.
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)-
Suppose there are two bidders for a single object. Each bidder has a value for the object, v1 and v2, which is randomly drawn uniformly from 0 to 80. (Note that this means the probability that a value is 25 or lower is 25/80, and more generally, the probability that a value is k or lower is k/80). Bidders see their own values but not the values of their rival bidders. Consider a first price sealed bid auction where the winner of the object is the bidder who submits the highest bid and pays the price that he bid. Suppose that you are bidder 1 and you believe that your rival always bids a constant fraction α of his value. (For example, if bidder 2’ value is 15, he will bid 15α.). 1. What is your expected winning probability of the auction from any given bid b1? (Hint, you win the auction when your bid amount b1 is greater than your opponent’s bid). 2. What is your expected payoff from any given bid, b1? (You need to write your answer as a function of v1, b1, and α). 3. Compute your best…
Apple and Google are interested in hiring a new CEO. Both firms have the same set of final candidates for the CEO position: Indra, Cao, and Virginia. Both firms need to decide who to make a job offer to, and the hiring process is such that they each only make one job offer. If, say, Apple makes a job offer to Indra and Google makes a job offer to one of the other candidates, then Apple’s probability of success in hiring Indra is pIndra. The same is true for Google. If they both make a job offer to Indra, each has probability pIndra/2 of success. It has been estimated that pIndra = 20%, and pCao = pVirginia = 30% (Note that these probabilities need not add up to 100%). Suppose that both Apple and Google attach a valuation of 10 to successfully hiring Indra, and a valuation of 7 to successfully hiring each of the other candidates. A hiring attempt, if unsuccessful, has a valuation of zero. Convert this story into a game by completing the following game table; Google…
Exercise 1.8. Consider the following "third-price" auction. There are n≥ 3 bidders. A single object is auctioned and Player / values the object $v,, with V, > 0. The bids are simultaneous and secret. The utility of Player / is: 0 if she does not win and (v-p) if she wins and pays $p. Every non-negative number is an admissible bid. Let b, denote the bid of Player i. The winner is the highest bidder. In case of ties the bidder with the lowest index among those who submitted the highest bid wins (e.g. if the highest bid is $120 and it is submitted by players 6, 12 and 15, then the winner is Player 6). The losers don't get anything and don't pay anything. The winner gets the object and pays the third highest bid, which is defined as follows. Let be the winner and fix a Player j such that b₁ = max({b,,...,b,}\ {b}) [if GAME THEORY - Giacomo Bonanno 39 max({b,...,b}\{b;}) contains more than one element, then we pick one of them]. Then the third price is defined as max({b₁,...,b}\{b,,b;}).…
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 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%
There are three bidders participating in a first-price auction for a painting. Each bidder has a private, independent value vi for such a painting that is drawn uniformly from [0,1] Assume that each bidder i has a linear bidding function bi=avi, where a>0. What is the bidding strategy of bidder i , namely bi in the Bayesian equilibrium?
Consider the following game, with a risk-neutral principal with preferences π = q - w hiring an agent with preferences U = √w-e.. The agent's reservation utility is given by Ū = 2, and the agent can choose between an effort level of 0 or an effort level of 10. Output is either 0 or 400 and follows the following probability distribution, a function of effort level and some uncertain factor: e=0 e=10 Probability (q=0) Probability (q=400) 0.6 0.4 0.9 0.1 What would the contract look like if the principal tried to push the wages when q=0 to zero? Would the principal want to do this? Explain.
There is a city, which looks like chopped isosceles triangle, as shown below. Citizens live uniformly distributed all over the city. Two ice-cream vendors, A and B, must independently set up stores in the city. Each citizen buys from the vendor closest to their location and when equidistant from both vendors they choose by coin toss. Each vendor’s aim is to maximize the expected number of customers. A choice of location by the two vendors is a Nash equilibrium if no vendor can do better by deviating unilaterally. Does this game have a Nash equilibrium? If so, describe it. If not, explain why not
Firms A and B are contemplating whether or not to invest in R&D. Each has two options: “Invest” and “Abstain.” A firm that invests will invent product X with a probability of 0.5, whereas a firm that abstains is incapable of invention. Investment costs $6. If a firm doesn’t invent X, it makes $0 in revenue. If a firm invests and is the only one to invent X, it becomes a monopolist and generates $20 in revenue. If both firms invent X, each firm becomes a duopolist, and generates $8 in revenue. Revenues are gross figures (i.e. they are not net of investment costs), and there are no costs besides investments costs (i.e. no variable cost of production etc.). The firms are risk-neutral entities, and are uninformed of each other’s investment decisions. The “research and development” game is best analyzed as a simultaneous move game, because the parties lack information about each other’s investment decisions. Find the Nash Equilibria (or Equilibrium) of the “research and development”…