Q. 2. Consider the game of voters participation. Two candidates A (with two suporters) and B (with remaining three voters supporting him) compete. Voters have the option of voting for the preferred candidate or abstain. If a voter decides to vote then her payoffs are 2-e, 1- c and - c if her preferred candidate wins, ties or loose respectively. Her payoffs are 2, 1 and 0 for the above outcomes if she abstains. Show that there is a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium in which both supporters of A votes with probability p (0

Q. 2. Consider the game of voters participation. Two candidates A (with two suporters) and B (with remaining three voters supporting him) compete. Voters have the option of voting for the preferred candidate or abstain. If a voter decides to vote then her payoffs are 2-e, 1- c and - c if her preferred candidate wins, ties or loose respectively. Her payoffs are 2, 1 and 0 for the above outcomes if she abstains. Show that there is a mixed strategy Nash equilibrium in which both supporters of A votes with probability p (0

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

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.
2. Consider the following Bayesian game with two players. Both players move simultaneously and player 1 can choose either H or L, while player 2's options are G, M, and D. With probability 1/2 the payoffs are given by "Game 1" : GMD H 1,2 1,0 1,3 L 2,4 0,0 0,5 and with probability 1/2 the payoffs are according to "Game 2" : G |M|D H 1,2 1,3 1,0 L 2,4 0,5 0,0 (a) Find the Nash Equilibria when neither player knows which game is actually played. (b) Assume now that player 2 knows which one among the two games is actually being played. Check that the game has a unique Bayesian Nash Equilibrium.
Exercise 6.8. Consider the following extensive-form game with cardinal payoffs: 1 R O player pay 000 2 1 M 3 b 010 O player 3's payoff 1 2 221 2 000 0 0 (a) Find all the pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Which ones are also subgame perfect? (b) [This is a more challenging question] Prove that there is no mixed-strategy Nash equilibrium where Player 1 plays Mwith probability strictly between 0 and 1.
Two politicians from the same party decide whether to support or oppose the gov- ernment's environmental policy. Politician A prefers that they both support, but Politician B prefers that they both oppose. Both politicians agree that the party should have a coherent position and the worst outcome is that one supports and the other opposes the policy. (a) Formulate this situation as a strategic game - specify the players, actions, and payoffs (you can set-up a table of the actions and payoffs). (b) What are the Nash equilibria of this game? Explain your answer.
0 E F 3 2 FIGURE 2 23 D G 2 H 0 1 (2) Two friends, Albert (A) and Berta (B), have to decide on going to one of three bars, Xenia's (X), Yara's (Y), or Zana's (Z). They decide to select a bar by alternatively vetoing bars until one remains. First Albert vetoes a bar. If at least two bars remain, then Berta vetoes another bar. That process continues until a single bar remains unvetoed. Suppose Albert prefers Xenia's to Yara's to Zana's and Berta prefers Zana's to Yara's to Xenia's. Assume that, for each of the two, going to their most preferred bar gives a utility of 2, going to their next preferred bar gives a utility of 1, and going to their least preferred bar gives a utility of 0. Model this as an extensive form game and find its Nash equilibria. Which of the Nash equilibria are subgame perfect?
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?
Player 2 C D A Player 1 2,3 В 6, —2 | 4, 3 7,8 Select the value corresponding to the probability with which player 2 plays C in the mixed strategy Nash equilibrium: O 1/8 O 1/6 1/5 O 1/4 1/3 1/2 2/3 O 3/4 4/5 O 5/6
GAME UUU B1 Player B B2 A1 7,13 5, 10 A2 3,8 9,16 Player A A3 5,8 4,7 In Game UUU (see table above), assuming players move simultaneously, Player A choosing A1 and Player B choosing B3 is a Nash equilibrium. Player A choosing A3 and Player B choosing B2 is a Nash equilibrium. Both Player A choosing A1 and Player B choosing B1 and Player A choosing A2 and player B choosing B2 are Nash equilibria in pure strategies Player A choosing A1 and Player B choosing B2 is a Nash equilibrium.
learn.canterbury.ac.nz Clasarsom Nov 15-ICO EUC LEARN | AKO See the game below and answer the questions 8 to 11: Player-1 C Player-2 X, Y Y Player-1 9 14 8. Player-2 16 17 16 Nash Equilibrium in this game: Select one: O a. Playert: C; Player2: X O b. Playert: C; Player2: Y Oc. Playert: L; Player2: X Od. Playert: L; Player2: Y e. None
Consider the following two-player game with three options for each player. (Payouts are listed for the row player first, then the column player.) player Y layery 3,3 A 1,5 4,4 6,2 K 8,1 3,7 5,2 0,6 1,1 Find a mixed Nash equilibrium for this game. Solution suggestion: Use two variables per player. If p and are the probabilities of selecting the first two strategies, then 1-p-q is the probability of selecting the third strategy. You will need to solve a system of equations.
Consider the strategic voting game discussed at the endof this chapter, where we saw that the strategy profile (Bustamante, Schwarzenegger,Schwarzenegger) is a Nash equilibrium of the game. Show that (Bustamante, Schwarzeneg-ger, Schwarzenegger) is, in fact , the only rationalizable strategy profile. Do this by firstconsidering the dominated strategies of player L. (Basically, the question is asking youto find the outcome of the iterative elimination of strictly dominated strategies)
GAME 5 Player B B2 B1 Player A A1 7, 3 5, 10 A2 3, 8 9, 6 In Game 5 above, O there are no Nash equilibria in pure strategies. Player A choosing A1 and Player B choosing B2 is a Nash equilibrium. O Player A choosing A1 and Player B choosing B1 is a Nash equilibrium. O Player A choosing A2 and Player B choosing B1 is a Nash equilibrium.