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 he buyer and seller play T the payoffs are 4 to each player. If both parties play S 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 S 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 ninimum 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 Od O 3/4

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 he buyer and seller play T the payoffs are 4 to each player. If both parties play S 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 S 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 ninimum 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 Od O 3/4

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.12P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider the following variation to the Rock (R), Paper (P), Scissors (S) game:• Suppose that the Player 1 (row player) has a single type, Normal.• Player 2 (column player) has two types Normal and Simple.• A player of Normal type plays this zero-sum game as we studied in class whereas a player of type Simple always play P.• Player 2 knows whether he is Normal or Simple, but player 1does not.a) Suppose player 2 is of type Normal with probability 1/3 and of type Simple with probability (2/3). Find all pure strategy Bayesian Nash Equilibria.b) Suppose player 2 is of type Normal with probability 2/3 and of type Simple with probability (1/3). Find all pure strategy Bayesian Nash Equilibria.
Consider the “trust game” discussed in class. The first player starts with a $100 endowment and chooses how much to give to the second player. The gift triples in value (i.e. if $20 is given, the second player receives $60). The second player then chooses how much to give back. The first player receives exactly how much is returned (i.e. if $40 is returned, the first player receives $40). The Nash equilibrium of the game is: Group of answer choices: -First player gives $100, second player returns nothing. -First player gives $50, second player returns $50. -First player gives $100, second player returns $300. -There is no Nash equilibrium of this game. -First player gives nothing, second player returns nothing.
Someone at a party pulls out a $100 bill and announces that he is going to auction it off. There are n=10 people at the partywho are potential bidders. The owner of the $100 bill puts forth the following procedure: All bidders simultaneously submit a written bid. Only the highest bidders pay their bid (assuming that the highest bid is positive). If m people submit the highest bid, then each receives 1/m of the $100. Each person’s strategy set is {0,1,2,...,1000}{0,1,2,...,1000} so bidding can go as high as $1,000. The payoff of a player bidding bi is:0 if bi < max{b1,b2,…,bn},and 100/m − bi if bi = max {b1,b2,…,bn}where,m is the number of bidders whose bid equals max{b1,...,bn}. How many pure-strategy Nash equilibria does this game have? 1) 0 2) 1 3) 4 4) More than 4.
Suppose two bidders compete for a single indivisible item (e.g., a used car, a piece of art, etc.). We assume that bidder 1 values the item at $v1, and bidder 2 values the item at $v2. We assume that v1 > v2. In this problem we study a second price auction, which proceeds as follows. Each player i = 1, 2 simultaneously chooses a bid bi ≥ 0. The higher of the two bidders wins, and pays the second highest bid (in this case, the other player’s bid). In case of a tie, suppose the item goes to bidder 1. If a bidder does not win, their payoff is zero; if the bidder wins, their payoff is their value minus the second highest bid. a) Now suppose that player 1 bids b1 = v2 and player 2 bids b2 = v1, i.e., they both bid the value of the other player. (Note that in this case, player 2 is bidding above their value!) Show that this is a pure NE of the second price auction. (Note that in this pure NE the player with the lower value wins, while in the weak dominant strategy equilibrium where both…
Consider the game of Chicken in which each player has the option to “get out of the way” and “hang tough” with payoffs: Get out of the way Hang tough Get out of the way 2,2 1,3 Hang tough 3,1 00 a. Find all pure strategy Nash equilibria, if they exist b. Let k be the probability that player 1 chooses “hang tough” and u be the probability that player two chooses “hang tough.” Find the mixed stragety Nash equilibria, if they exist
Consider the following coordination game: Player 2P1 Comedy Show Concert Comedy Show 11,5 0,0 Concert 0,0 2,2 a. Find the Nash equilibrium(s) for this game.b. Now assume Player 1 and Player 2 have distributional preferences. Specifically, both people greatly care about the utility of the other person. In fact, they place equal weight on their outcome and the other person’soutcome, ρ = σ = ½. Find the Nash equilibrium(s) with these utilitarianpreferences.c. Now consider the case where Player1 and Player2 do not like each other. Specifically, any positive outcome for the other person is viewed as anegative outcome for the individual, ρ = σ = -1. Find the Nashequilibrium(s) with these envious preferences.
We’ll now show how a college degree can get you a better job even if itdoesn’t make you a better worker. Consider a two-player game between aprospective employee, whom we’ll refer to as the applicant, and an employer. The applicant’s type is her intellect, which may be low, moderate,or high, with probability 1/3 , 1/2 , and 1/6 , respectively. After the applicantlearns her type, she decides whether or not to go to college. The personalcost in gaining a college degree is higher when the applicant is less intelligent, because a less smart student has to work harder if she is to graduate. Assume that the cost of gaining a college degree is 2, 4, and 6 for an applicant who is of high, moderate, and low intelligence, respectively.The employer decides whether to offer the applicant a job as a manageror as a clerk. The applicant’s payoff to being hired as a manager is 15,while the payoff to being a clerk is 10. These payoffs are independent ofthe applicant’s type. The employer’s payoff from…
Mohamed and Kate each pick an integer number between 1 and 3 (inclusive). They make their choices sequentially.Mohamed is the first player and Kate the second player. If they pick the same number each receives a payoff equal to the number they named. If they pick a different number, they get nothing. What is the SPE of the game? a. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate is indifferent between 1, 2 and 3. b. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate chooses 1 if Mohamed chooses 1, 2 if Mohamed chooses 2, and 3 if Mohamed chooses 3. c. Mohamed chooses 1 and Kate chooses 1 if Mohamed chooses 1, 2 if Mohamed chooses 2 and 3 if Mohamed chooses 3. d. Mohamed chooses 3 and Kate chooses 3.
Consider the following two-player game.First, player 1 selects a number x≥0. Player 2 observes x. Then, simultaneously andindependently, player 1 selects a number y1 and player 2 selects a number y2, at which pointthe game ends.Player 1’s payoff is: u1(x; y1) = −3y21 + 6y1y2 −13x2 + 8xPlayer 2’s payoff is: u2(y2) = 6y1y2 −6y22 + 12xy2Draw the game tree of this game and identify its Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium.
Theo and Addy are deciding what toys to pick out at the toy store. Depending on what toys they pick, they can play different games together, but they can’t coordinate their choices. They can’t talk to one another at all until after that make their choice. Below is their payout matrix which shows their utility for each choice. All the bold figures are for Theo and all the non bold figures are for Addy. Addy Strategies Theo Strategies Toy Gas Pump Jump Rope Toy food 20 10 10 3 Ball 7 3 9 4 a) If Theo chooses Toy Food, what would be the possible outcomes for Addy? What would be best for Addy? b) If Addy chose a Toy Gas Pump, what are the possible outcomes for Theo? What would be best for Theo? c) Does Addy have a dominant strategy? If yes, what is her strategy? If not how can you tell? d) Does Theo have a dominant strategy? If yes, what is her strategy? If not how…
Choice under uncertainty. Consider a coin-toss game in which the player gets $30 if they win, and $5 if they lose. The probability of winning is 50%. (a) Alan is (just) willing to pay $15 to play this game. What is Alan’s attitude to risk? Show your work. (b) Assume a market with many identical Alans, who are all forced to pay $15 to play this coin-toss game. An insurer offers an insurance policy to protect the Alans from the risk. What would be the fair (zero profit) premium on this policy? can you help me for par (b) plase?
Choice under uncertainty. Consider a coin-toss game in which the player gets $30 if they win, and $5 if they lose. The probability of winning is 50%. (a) Alan is (just) willing to pay $15 to play this game. What is Alan’s attitude to risk? Show your work.(b) Assume a market with many identical Alans, who are all forced to pay $15 to play this coin-toss game. An insurer offers an insurance policy to protect the Alans from the risk. What would be the fair (zero profit) premium on this policy? i need help with question B please.