MANAGERIAL/ECON+BUS/STR CONNECT ACCESS
9th Edition
ISBN: 2810022149537
Author: Baye
Publisher: MCG
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 10, Problem 4CACQ
a)
To determine
The one-shot Nash equilibrium.
b)
To determine
If it is known by the player that game is repeated three times will it lead to payoff that is better than one-shot Nash equilibrium.
c)
To determine
Can the players achieve payoff that is better than the one-shot Nash equilibrium if the game is repeated infinite times with 6 percent interest rate.
d)
To determine
If the players have no knowledge about the times a game is repeated but the players know that the probability of ending a game after a given pay is
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
Consider the following game in normal form.
Not cooperate
Cooperate
Not cooperate
20,20
50,0
Cooperate
0,50
40,40
What is Nash equilibrium? Is it efficient? Why?
What needs to be complied with so that the players would like to cooperate? What happens when one of the players does not cooperate? Why? Define trigger strategy.
Calculate the discount factor (δ) that would make both players decide to cooperate.
Consider a game where player A moves first, choosing between Left and Right. Then, after observing player A’s choice, player B moves next choosing between Up and Down. Which of the following is true?
This is a game where players A and B have the same number of strategies.
Player A will get a higher payoff than player B as A moves first.
This is game will only have one Nash equilibrium.
This is a game of perfect information.
Game theory can capture strategic situations where your outcome depends not only upon your own choice but also upon the choice of another. Present a coordination game of your choice where you and another player each have two choices or strategies. Explain in words the Nash Equilibrium concept, and identify the Nash equilibrium or Nash equilibria for your game. Explain why the outcomes that are not Nash equilibria are not.
Chapter 10 Solutions
MANAGERIAL/ECON+BUS/STR CONNECT ACCESS
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- If a player does not have a dominant strategy, can the game still have a Nash equilibrium? No. At least one player must have a dominant strategy for the outcome to be a Nash equilibrium. Yes. There is no need for a dominant strategy to exist in order to have a Nash equilibrium. The outcome is a Nash equilibrium because each player has made his or her optimal choice based on the optimal choice of the other player. No. If there is no dominant strategy, there is no predictable outcome and therefore no Nash equilibrium. Yes. A Nash equilibrium is possible only if neither player has a dominant strategy. If a dominant strategy exists, it is no longer a Nash equilibrium.arrow_forwardTwo individuals are bargaining over the distribution of $100 in which payoffs must be in increments of $5. Each player must submit a one-time bid. If the sum of the bids is less than or equal to $100, each player gets the amount of the bid and the game ends. If the sum of the bids is greater than $100, the game ends and the players get nothing. Does this game have a Nash equilibrium? What is the most likely equilibrium strategy profile for this game?arrow_forwardDescribe 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).arrow_forward
- Consider the following extensive form of the game. The outcome in the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of this game is [ Select one option] ["Large; Don't Enter", "Large; Enter", "Small; Don't Enter", "Small; Enter"]. It would not pay for the incumbent to produce the large quantity if its profits from producing large quantity is less than $ [ Select one option ] ["50", "60", "100", "0"].arrow_forwardThis table shows a game played between two players, A and B. The payoffs in the table are shown as (Payoff to A, Payoff to B). B Right (2, 2) (1, 3) Left (3, 1) (0,0) Up A Down Which outcome is the Nash equilibrium in this game? (Up, Right) (Up, Left) (Down, Right) (Down, Left)arrow_forwardSuppose that you and a friend play a matching pennies game in which each of you uncovers a penny. If both pennies show heads or both show tails, you keep both. If one shows heads and the other shows tails, your friend keeps them. Show the pay- off matrix. What, if any, is the pure-strategy Nash equilibrium to this game? Is there a mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium? If so, what is it?arrow_forward
- True or false? If a game has a Nash equilibrium, that equilibrium will be the equilibrium that we expect to observe in the real world. False. People don’t always act in the way that a Nash equilibrium requires. People don’t always make the necessary calculations and they take into account the outcome of others. False. A Nash equilibrium is based on very strict assumptions that rarely hold in the real world. No real-world situation leads to a Nash equilibrium. True. As long as people are rational and have their own self-interest at heart, real-life games will result in the Nash equilibrium. True. Nash’s theory of equilibrium outcomes was derived from real-world interactions. The theory holds true for almost all real-world scenarios.arrow_forwardIn a small town there are two pizza restaurants . If neither restaurant advertises, its revenue will not change. If only one firm advertises, the firm that advertises will double its revenue and the firm that doesn't advertise will see a decrease in its revenue, but if both firms advertise, their revenue will not change. What outcome would be predicted by game theory in this market? Both restaurants will advertise. Game theory would predict chat sometimes one restaurant would advertise, and the rest of the time both will advertise. Neither restaurant will advertise Game theory is only a theory and cannot predict real-world events. One restaurant will advertise.arrow_forwardA and B are competitors in the mobile phone industry. Both A and B have to decide whether to participate or not to participate in a Phone for the Future Trade Fair next month. The matrix payoff below shows the profits (USD million) corresponding to their actions. a) What is the Nash equilibrium of the above game? b) Is the Nash equilibrium Pareto Optima? Explain. c) Suppose B is pessimistic of A's rationality, what is B's strategy? Compare and comment on B's strategy in (a) and (c). A Participate Do not participate B Participate Do not participate 400,1000 200,200 500,500 1000,400arrow_forward
- Answer all the questions, show all the working. Consider the following game in normal form. Not cooperate Cooperate Not cooperate 20,20 50,0 Cooperate 0,50 40,40 What is Nash equilibrium? Is it efficient? Why? What needs to be complied with so that the players would like to cooperate? What happens when one of the players does not cooperate? Why? Define trigger strategy. Calculate the discount factor (δ) that would make both players decide to cooperate.arrow_forwardFind all of the Nash equilibrium of the following three player game. Player 1 chooses rows (a,b). Player 2 chooses columns (c,d). Player 3 chooses matrices (x.y). Player 3 receives the third listed payoff for cach outcome. 5,5,5 4,4,0 8,8,3 7,7,3 1,3,1 4,2,0 3,2,4 3,1,0 a by A) (b,d.x) and (a,d.y) B) (b.cy) OC) (b,d,x) D) (a,d,x) and (b,c.y) E) (b,c,x) OF) (a,d.x)arrow_forwardHere is a payoff matrix that is interesting. I am not in an imaginative mood, so I won't try to tell a story about why the payoffs come out this way. Find all the pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Is this a game where you expect that players would end up in a Nash equilibrium? What would you expect to happen and why? Row Top Row Bottom Column Left 4, -3000 12,8 Column Right 10,6 5, 4arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Exploring EconomicsEconomicsISBN:9781544336329Author:Robert L. SextonPublisher:SAGE Publications, Inc
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an...EconomicsISBN:9781305506381Author:James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. HarrisPublisher:Cengage Learning
Exploring Economics
Economics
ISBN:9781544336329
Author:Robert L. Sexton
Publisher:SAGE Publications, Inc
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: Applications, Strategies an...
Economics
ISBN:9781305506381
Author:James R. McGuigan, R. Charles Moyer, Frederick H.deB. Harris
Publisher:Cengage Learning