PLAYER BCOOPERATEDEFECTA: 1 year jailA: 10 years jailB:1 year jailB: 0 years jailA: 0 years jail A: 5 years jailB: 10 years jail B: 5 years jailIf this game represents the results of two players who have been arrested andinterrogated by police and offered a lower sentence if they cooperate with theinvestigation, what is the most likely outcome?neither player will cooperateOnly player A will cooperateboth players will cooperate with policeOnly player B will cooperatePLAYER ADEFECTCOOPERATE

This game represents the following: If both players cooperate, then both will get a 1-year jail each…

Answered: PLAYER B COOPERATE DEFECT A: 1 year…

PLAYER B COOPERATE DEFECT A: 1 year jailA: 10 years jail B: 1 year jail B: 0 years jail A: 0 years jail A: 5 years jail B: 10 years jail B: 5 years jail DEFECT COOPERATE

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter8: Game Theory

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8.9P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Does each individual in a prisoners dilemma benefit more from cooperation or from pursuing self-interest? Explain briefly.
8. Two states, A and B, have signed an arms-control agreement. This agreementcommits them to refrain from building certain types of weapons. The agreement is supposed tohold for an indefinite length of time. However, A and B remain potential enemies who wouldprefer to be able to cheat and build more weapons than the other. The payoff table for A (player1, the row player) and B (player 2, the column player) in each period after signing thisagreement is below. a) First assume that each state uses Tit-for-Tat (TFT) as a strategy in this repeated game.The rate of return is r. For what values of r would it be worth it for player A to cheat bybuilding additional weapons just once against TFT? b) For what values of r would it be worth deviating from the agreement forever to buildweapons? c) Convert both values you found in parts a and b to the equivalent discount factor dusing the formula given in lecture and section. d) Use the answers you find to discuss the relationship between d and r:…
Consider the location game we covered in Lecture 3. Now assume there arethree players (vendors). As we assumed in the lecture, consumers in each area choosethe closest vendor and if there are multiple closest vendors then these vendors receiveequal share of consumers in the area. Notice Si = {1, 2, 3, ...., 9} for i = 1, 2, 3. Here aresome examples of payoffs: u1(1, 1, 1) = 3, u1(1, 1, 9) = u2(1, 1, 9) = 2.25, u3(1, 1, 9) =4.5, u1(1, 5, 9) = u3(1, 5, 9) = 2.5 and u2(1, 5, 9) = 4. (a) Is s′1 = 1 strictly dominated by s′′1 = 2 for player 1?(b) Is s′1 = 1 weakly dominated by s′′1 = 2 for player 1?(c) Can you find a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies?
A game is played as follows: First Player 1 decides (Y or N) whether or not to play.If she chooses N, the game ends. If she chooses Y, then Player 2 decides (Y or N) whetheror not to play. If he chooses N the game ends. If he chooses Y, then they go ahead and playanother game with the payoffs shown below. A player who opts out by choosing N gets 2 andthe other player gets 0. Draw the tree of this game and then find the two subgame-perfect Nashequilibria.
answer the ff: Suppose that each company cancharge either a high price for tickets or a low price. Ifone company charges $300, it earns low profit if theother company also charges $300 and high profit ifthe other company charges $600. On the other hand,if the company charges $600, it earns very low profit ifthe other company charges $300 and medium profitif the other company also charges $600.a. Draw the decision box for this game.b. What is the Nash equilibrium in this game?Explain.c. Is there an outcome that would be better than theNash equilibrium for both airlines? How could itbe achieved? Who would lose if it were achieved?
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.
Paramter y = 0 If ⟨a, d⟩ is played in the first period and ⟨b, e⟩ is played in the second period, whatis the resulting (repeated game) payoff for the row player?
a Suppose you are given a choice between thefollowing options:A1: Win $30 for sureA2: 80% chance of winning $45 and 20% chance ofA2: winning nothing B1: 25% chance of winning $30B2: 20% chance of winning $45Most people prefer A1 to A2 and B2 to B1. Explainwhy this behavior violates the assumption that decisionmakers maximize expected utility.b Now suppose you play the following game: You havea 75% chance of winning nothing and a 25% chance ofplaying the second stage of the game. If you reach thesecond stage, you have a choice of two options (C1 andC2), but your choice must be made now, before youreach the second stage.C1: Win $30 for sureC2: 80% chance of winning $45 13.5 Bayes’ Rule and Decision Trees 767Most people choose C1 over C2 and B2 to B1 (from part(a)). Explain why this again violates the assumption ofexpected utility maximization. Tversky and Kahneman(1981) speculate that most people are attracted to thesure $30 in the second stage, even though the secondstage may never be…
Cameron and Luke are playing a game called ”Race to 10”. Cameron goes first, and the players take turns choosing either 1 or 2. In each turn, they add the new number to a running total. The player who brings the total to exactly 10 wins the game. a) If both Cameron and Luke play optimally, who will win the game? Does the game have a first-mover advantage or a second-mover advantage? b) Suppose the game is modified to ”Race to 11” (i.e, the player who reaches 11 first wins). Who will win the game if both players play their optimal strategies? What if the game is ”Race to 12”? Does the result change? c) Consider the general version of the game called ”Race to n,” where n is a positive integer greater than 0. What are the conditions on n such that the game has a first mover advantage? What are the conditions on n such that the game has a second mover advantage?
H2. One day, Sam and Ryan play odds/evens to see who gets the last doughnut. On command, they each extend one or two fingers. If the sum is odd Sam wins the doughnut, if the sum is even Ryan wins the doughnut. Suppose the payoff from winning the doughnut is 1 and the payoff from losing is 0. a) Illustrate this interaction as a game in matrix form. b) Suppose that Sam thinks that Ryan will play one finger for sure? What will Sam play? Does Sam have reason to think that Ryan will play one finger for sure? c) Do either of them have a strictly dominated strategy? d) Find the pure strategy Nash equilibria of the game, if any. e) Suppose that Sam thinks that Ryan will play one finger or two fingers with even odds. Will Ryan play one finger for sure, play two fingers for sure or play each strategy with even odds? Does Sam have good reason to believe that Ryan will play one finger or two fingers with even odds?
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 game with the payoffs below. Which of the possible outcomes are MORE efficient than the Nash Equilibrium (NE)? Note, they do NOT need to be Nash equilibria themselves, they just need to be more efficient than the NE. Multiple answers are possible, but not necessary. You need to check ALL correct answers for full credit. JILL High Medium LowMAGGIE Left 3,4 2,3 2,2Center 4,8 9,7 8,7Right 7,6 8,5 9,4Group of answer choices (Left, Low) There is no strategy combination that is more efficient than the Nash equilibrium for this game. (Right, Medium) (Left, High) (Center, Medium) (Center, High) (Center, Low) (Left, Medium) (Right, Low) (Right, High)