Subgame perfection is a refinement of Nash Equilibrium that requiresSelect one:Oa. credibility/rationality at every point/path in the game, regardiess of whether thase pointa/paths are actualy part of the Nash equilibriumOb focalness in equilibriumO a. credibilityirationality only along the equilibrium pathO d. firms do not cheat on their output agreementsO e. perfect and skilled play by all piayers

A subgame perfect equilibrium is a refinement of the Nash equilibrium utilized in dynamic games in…

Subgame perfection is a refinement of Nash Equilibrium that requires Select one: Oa credibility/rationality at every pointipath in the game, regardiess of whether those pointa/paths are actualy part of the Nash equilibrum Ob focalness in equilibrium Oc. credibility/rationality only along the equilbrium path O d. firms do not cheat on their output agreements Oe perfect and skilled play by all piayers

Subgame perfection is a refinement of Nash Equilibrium that requires Select one: Oa credibility/rationality at every pointipath in the game, regardiess of whether those pointa/paths are actualy part of the Nash equilibrum Ob focalness in equilibrium Oc. credibility/rationality only along the equilbrium path O d. firms do not cheat on their output agreements Oe perfect and skilled play by all piayers

Principles of Microeconomics (MindTap Course List)

8th Edition

ISBN:9781305971493

Author:N. Gregory Mankiw

Publisher:N. Gregory Mankiw

Chapter17: Oligopoly

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 9PA

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

A) Focus on the strategic game at the lower-right side of the gametree. Find all the Nash equilibria for this subgame, including the mixed-strategyones. (b) Find all the subgame perfect equilibria for the entire game, allowingfor both pure and mixed strategies
1. Consider the pricing game between firm 1 (row) and firm 2 (column) belowwhere each number represents the profits made by each firm.:Table 1: Pricing gameLow HighLow 288,288 360,216High 216,360 324,324 a) Point out the Nash equilibrium. Is this a unique Nash equilibrium?c) What type of commitment can firm 1 make to improve its pay-off?Can it be classified as a threat or promise? (Assume that the commitmentis credible.)d) How would you represent the game as a game tree with the option tocommit?2. Consider the signalling / production game with the order of play given below.Assuming that the signal is informative (i.e. education is sufficiently costly),how would you change the order of the game to make sure that poolingequilibriums are ruled out? Verbally motivate your answer.• Nature chooses ability of the workers a ∈ (H, L), ability is observed byworkers but not employers.• The worker choose an education level s ∈ (0, 1).• The employer offer contracts w(s).• The worker accepts or…
Subject: Manegerial economics & policy c) Which effect dominates, the price effect or the quality effect of a price change if demand isupward sloping? d) Why might demand be downward sloping in a market with imperfect information eventhough the market is otherwise perfectly competitive? e) Why are focal points important for noncooperative games?
Consider trade relations between the United States and Mexico. Assume that the leaders of the two countries believe the payoffs to alternative trade policies are shown in the image attached. a) What is the dominant strategy for the United States? For Mexico? Explain. b) Define Nash equilibrium. What is the Nash equilibrium for trade policy? c) In 1993, the U.S. Congress ratified the North American Free Trade Agreement, in which the United States and Mexico agreed to reduce trade barriers simultaneously. Do the perceived payoffs shown here justify this approach to trade policy? Explain.
Solve for the Nash equilibrium (or equilibria) in each of the following games. (a) The following two-by-two game is a little harder to solve since firm 2’spreferred strategy depends of what firm 1 does. But firm 1 has a dominantstrategy so this game has one Nash equilibrium. Firm 2 Launch Don’tFirm 1 Launch 60, -10 100, 0 Don’t 80, 30 120, 0 What is the Nash equilibrium of this simultaneous-move game? (b) What would the outcome of this game be if instead firm 1 moved first and then, after seeing what firm 1 chose, firm 2 chose it strategy? In this case firm 1 doesn’t necessarily need to choose a best response, but firm 2 must choose a best response since it moves second.
Consider the extensive form game portrayed below. The top number at aterminal node is player 1’s payoff, the middle number is player 2’s payoff,and the bottom number is player 3’s payoff.a. Derive the strategy set for each player. (Note: If you do not want to listall of the strategies, you can provide a general description of a player’sstrategy, give an example, and state how many strategies are in thestrategy set.)b. Derive all subgame perfect Nash equilibria. c. Derive a Nash equilibrium that is not a SPNE, and explain why it isnot a SPNE.
1) What are the Nash equilibria? Which one is unreasonable/non-credible threat? 2) What are the subgame perfect Nash equilibria? Does SPNE concept eliminate the unreasonable Nash equilibrium?
The prisoners' dilemma is a two-person game illus·trating thata. t he cooperative outcome could be worse for bothpeople than t he Nash equilibrium.b . even if the cooperative outcome is better than theNash equilibrium for one person, it might be worsefor the other.c. even if cooperation is better than the Nash equilibrium,each person might have an incentive not tocooperate.d . rational, seff·interested individuals will naturallyavoid the Nash equilibrium because it is worse forboth of them.
Consider trade relations between the United States and Mexico. Assume that the leaders of the two countries believe the payoffs to alternative trade policies are as follows a. What is the dominant strategy for the United States? For Mexico? Explain. b. Define Nash equilibrium. What is the Nash equilibrium for trade policy? c. In 1993, the U.S.Congress ratified the North American Free Trade Agreement, in which the United States and Mexico agreed to reduce trade barriers simultaneously. Do the perceived payoffs shown here justify this approach to trade policy? Explain. d. Based on your understanding of the gains from trade (discussed in Chapters 3 and 9), do you think that these payoffs actually reflect a nation's welfare under the four possible outcomes?
Consider the strategic form game shown. a. Assume that both players are rational. What happens?b. Assume that both players are rational and that each believes that theother is rational. What happens?c. Find the strategies that survive the ISDS.
12. Consider a game where each player picks a number from 0 to 60. The guess that is closest to half ofthe average of the chosen numbers wins a prize. If several peopleare equally close, then they share theprize. The game theory implies that (A) all players have dominant strategies to choose 0 (B) all players have dominant strategies to choose 30 (C) there is a Nash equilibrium where all players pick 0 (D) there is a Nash equilibrium where all players pick positive numbers 13. Behavioral data in such games suggests that (A) most subjects choose 0; (B) most subjects choose 30; (C) common answers include 30, 15, 7.5, and 0; (D) most subjects use randomization. Can you help me answer number 13 please?
Consider the following price game: Firm 1 Firm 2 High Low High 20, 20 12, 24 Low 24, 12 14, 14 Remark: In simultaneous move games (games with rows and columns) theconvention is to write the row player’s payoff first and the column player’spayoff second. (a) What is the Nash equilibrium of this game? Recall that for each playeryou should find the best response to each of the opponents’ strategies andunderline the associated payoff. Then look for a cell where both strategiesare best responses to each other. This is a Nash equilibrium. (b) Does either firm have a dominate strategy (a strategy that is always abest response)?