ECON 282 Final Practice Problems

Similar documents
final examination on May 31 Topics from the latter part of the course (covered in homework assignments 4-7) include:

Summary Overview of Topics in Econ 30200b: Decision theory: strong and weak domination by randomized strategies, domination theorem, expected utility

Repeated Games. Economics Microeconomic Theory II: Strategic Behavior. Shih En Lu. Simon Fraser University (with thanks to Anke Kessler)

ECO 463. SimultaneousGames

THEORY: NASH EQUILIBRIUM

Exercises for Introduction to Game Theory SOLUTIONS

(a) Left Right (b) Left Right. Up Up 5-4. Row Down 0-5 Row Down 1 2. (c) B1 B2 (d) B1 B2 A1 4, 2-5, 6 A1 3, 2 0, 1

ECON 2100 Principles of Microeconomics (Summer 2016) Game Theory and Oligopoly

Student Name. Student ID

Resource Allocation and Decision Analysis (ECON 8010) Spring 2014 Foundations of Game Theory

Games of Perfect Information and Backward Induction

Lecture 5: Subgame Perfect Equilibrium. November 1, 2006

Game Theory Lecturer: Ji Liu Thanks for Jerry Zhu's slides

DYNAMIC GAMES. Lecture 6

Strategies and Game Theory

Games in Extensive Form, Backward Induction, and Subgame Perfection:

Advanced Microeconomics (Economics 104) Spring 2011 Strategic games I

Normal Form Games: A Brief Introduction

U strictly dominates D for player A, and L strictly dominates R for player B. This leaves (U, L) as a Strict Dominant Strategy Equilibrium.

UPenn NETS 412: Algorithmic Game Theory Game Theory Practice. Clyde Silent Confess Silent 1, 1 10, 0 Confess 0, 10 5, 5

NORMAL FORM (SIMULTANEOUS MOVE) GAMES

Section Notes 6. Game Theory. Applied Math 121. Week of March 22, understand the difference between pure and mixed strategies.

ECON 312: Games and Strategy 1. Industrial Organization Games and Strategy

Multiagent Systems: Intro to Game Theory. CS 486/686: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

Econ 302: Microeconomics II - Strategic Behavior. Problem Set #5 June13, 2016

Economics 201A - Section 5

Simon Fraser University Fall 2014

Game Theory. Lecture Notes By Y. Narahari. Department of Computer Science and Automation Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, India August 2012

The extensive form representation of a game

Mixed Strategies; Maxmin

Backward Induction and Stackelberg Competition

Lecture 7: Dominance Concepts

FIRST PART: (Nash) Equilibria

ECON 301: Game Theory 1. Intermediate Microeconomics II, ECON 301. Game Theory: An Introduction & Some Applications

3 Game Theory II: Sequential-Move and Repeated Games

Homework 5 Answers PS 30 November 2013

Domination Rationalizability Correlated Equilibrium Computing CE Computational problems in domination. Game Theory Week 3. Kevin Leyton-Brown

Game Theory Refresher. Muriel Niederle. February 3, A set of players (here for simplicity only 2 players, all generalized to N players).

1. Simultaneous games All players move at same time. Represent with a game table. We ll stick to 2 players, generally A and B or Row and Col.

Multiagent Systems: Intro to Game Theory. CS 486/686: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

INSTRUCTIONS: all the calculations on the separate piece of paper which you do not hand in. GOOD LUCK!

14.12 Game Theory Lecture Notes Lectures 10-11

CMU Lecture 22: Game Theory I. Teachers: Gianni A. Di Caro

1\2 L m R M 2, 2 1, 1 0, 0 B 1, 0 0, 0 1, 1

Dominance and Best Response. player 2

Terry College of Business - ECON 7950

Reading Robert Gibbons, A Primer in Game Theory, Harvester Wheatsheaf 1992.

CSCI 699: Topics in Learning and Game Theory Fall 2017 Lecture 3: Intro to Game Theory. Instructor: Shaddin Dughmi

ECO 220 Game Theory. Objectives. Agenda. Simultaneous Move Games. Be able to structure a game in normal form Be able to identify a Nash equilibrium

Game Theory: Introduction. Game Theory. Game Theory: Applications. Game Theory: Overview

Lecture 6: Basics of Game Theory

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Dominance

RECITATION 8 INTRODUCTION

Computing Nash Equilibrium; Maxmin

CS510 \ Lecture Ariel Stolerman

Contents. MA 327/ECO 327 Introduction to Game Theory Fall 2017 Notes. 1 Wednesday, August Friday, August Monday, August 28 6

Note: A player has, at most, one strictly dominant strategy. When a player has a dominant strategy, that strategy is a compelling choice.

BS2243 Lecture 3 Strategy and game theory

DECISION MAKING GAME THEORY

CSC304: Algorithmic Game Theory and Mechanism Design Fall 2016

Lecture 7. Repeated Games

Multiagent Systems: Intro to Game Theory. CS 486/686: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence

Weeks 3-4: Intro to Game Theory

Dominant and Dominated Strategies

Introduction to Game Theory

CMU-Q Lecture 20:

Game Theory: The Basics. Theory of Games and Economics Behavior John Von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern (1943)

Chapter 15: Game Theory: The Mathematics of Competition Lesson Plan

Appendix A A Primer in Game Theory

Strategic Bargaining. This is page 1 Printer: Opaq

n-person Games in Normal Form

Extensive-Form Games with Perfect Information

Nash Equilibrium. Felix Munoz-Garcia School of Economic Sciences Washington State University. EconS 503

Finance Solutions to Problem Set #8: Introduction to Game Theory

1. Introduction to Game Theory

Dominant and Dominated Strategies

Spring 2014 Quiz: 10 points Answer Key 2/19/14 Time Limit: 53 Minutes (FAS students: Teaching Assistant. Total Point Value: 10 points.

EC3224 Autumn Lecture #02 Nash Equilibrium

SF2972 Game Theory Written Exam March 17, 2011

Introduction to Game Theory

ECO 199 B GAMES OF STRATEGY Spring Term 2004 B February 24 SEQUENTIAL AND SIMULTANEOUS GAMES. Representation Tree Matrix Equilibrium concept

Partial Answers to the 2005 Final Exam

Game theory. Logic and Decision Making Unit 2

Game Theory and Randomized Algorithms

Game Theory and Algorithms Lecture 3: Weak Dominance and Truthfulness

Chapter 13. Game Theory

LECTURE 26: GAME THEORY 1

Chapter 3 Learning in Two-Player Matrix Games

Sequential games. We may play the dating game as a sequential game. In this case, one player, say Connie, makes a choice before the other.

Advanced Microeconomics: Game Theory

Game Theory and MANETs: A Brief Tutorial

Solution Concepts 4 Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies

CPS 570: Artificial Intelligence Game Theory

Finite games: finite number of players, finite number of possible actions, finite number of moves. Canusegametreetodepicttheextensiveform.

4/21/2016. Intermediate Microeconomics W3211. Lecture 20: Game Theory 2. The Story So Far. Today. But First.. Introduction

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

Microeconomics II Lecture 2: Backward induction and subgame perfection Karl Wärneryd Stockholm School of Economics November 2016

Minmax and Dominance

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

Signaling Games

Transcription:

ECON 282 Final Practice Problems S. Lu Multiple Choice Questions Note: The presence of these practice questions does not imply that there will be any multiple choice questions on the final exam. 1. How many Nash equilibria does the following game have? A) one B) two C) three D) infinitely many Up 1,1 0,3 Down 2,2 0,4 2. Which of the following statements is/are true? i. In every game, every subgame-perfect equilibrium is a Nash equilibrium. ii. In simultaneous-move games, all Nash equilibria are subgame-perfect equilibria. A) i only B) ii only C) neither i nor ii D) both i and ii 3. Consider the following game: Top 0,0 1+2L,G Bottom L,1 1,0 If a Nash equilibrium where neither player plays a pure strategy exists, then that strategy profile will depend on: A) G, but not L B) L, but not G C) neither G nor L D) both G and L 4. Consider a prisoner s dilemma repeated a million times. The folk theorem tells us that: A) There exists a Nash equilibrium where (Cooperate, Cooperate) occurs every period. B) If players are patient enough, for any outcome in the stage game, there exists a subgameperfect equilibrium where that outcome occurs every period. C) If players are patient enough, there exists a subgame-perfect equilibrium where (Cooperate, Cooperate) occurs every period. D) None of the above

TRUE/FALSE and Explain Note: Again, this type of question may or may not be present on the final exam. 1. If the continuity axiom of expected utility theory holds, then, given any lottery L, there exist lotteries L and L such that L is strictly preferred to L, which is strictly preferred to L. 2. Consider a simultaneous-move stage game G, a finitely repeated game R where G is played T times, and an infinitely repeated game R where G is repeated infinitely many times. In both R and R, the outcome of each stage is made public before the next stage, and all players share a discount factor δ (0,1). As T, subgame-perfect equilibrium (SPE) yields similar predictions in R as in R. (In other words, the set of SPE in a very long finitely repeated game looks close to the set of SPE in an infinitely repeated game.) 3. Consider the following three-player simultaneous-move game. First L R Second L R T 2,-2,10 5,2,-10 T -1,8,-10 3,4,10 M 0,7,6-4,-7,7 M -3,0,8 1,2,9 B -5,-3,-10 6,3,10 B 0,5,10-2,6,-10 Player 1 chooses between T, M and B (i.e. picks the row). Player 2 chooses between L and R (i.e. picks the column). Player 3 chooses between First and Second (i.e. picks the table). The i th number in each cell is player i s payoff. a) (B; 0.4 L, 0.6 R; 0.5 First, 0.5 Second) is a strategy that gives player 1 an expected payoff of 0.2. b) (50% chance of (T, L, Second), 50% chance of (T, R, Second)) and (B, R, Second) are two outcomes between which player 2 is indifferent. Problems 1. Consider the following simultaneous-move game: Center Top 4,-2 5,-3 3,-1 Middle 5,5 5,1 1,1 Bottom 4,0 6,-2 0,2 a) List all pure-strategy Nash equilibria in the above game. b) Find the expected payoff of the player picking the row (player 1) in the other Nash equilibrium. (There is exactly one Nash equilibrium that is not in pure strategies.)

2. Perform iteration of strictly dominated strategies (ISD) on the following game. Make sure to: - List your steps in order and briefly justify each one. - Explain why no further step is possible. L C R T 4,3 5,8-3,-4 M 6,-3-1,-2 7,9 B 9,1 3,4-2,10 3. Consider the following simultaneous-move game G: Top x,5 4,6 Bottom 2,9 3,7 For each value of x other than x=2, find every Nash equilibrium of G and briefly explain why there are no Nash equilibria other than the one(s) that you have found. 4. Donald, Ted and Marco are considering whether to run in an election. In order to win the election directly, a candidate must get 50% of the vote. If no one wins directly, then a winner is chosen at random according to the following probabilities: Donald 0%, Ted 10%, Marco 50%, someone else 40% The probabilities of winning the election directly are as follows: - If all three candidates run: Donald 50%, Ted 10%, Marco 0% - If Donald and Ted run: Donald 60%, Ted 40% - If Donald and Marco run: Donald 70%, Marco 30% - If Marco and Ted run: Ted 60%, Marco 40% - If only one person runs, that person automatically wins directly. - If no one runs, no one wins directly, and a winner is chosen as described above. Donald, Ted and Marco are expected utility maximizers. Their utility from winning is 10, and they incur utility cost c > 0 if and only if they run. First suppose that all three players simultaneously decide whether to run. For parts a and b, you do not need to show your work, but please clearly indicate what your answer is. a) Give the normal form of this game. Since this is a three-player game, do this in two tables, where: Donald (player 1) picks the row, Ted (player 2) picks the column, and Marco (player 3) picks the table. b) For every value of c > 0, find all pure-strategy Nash equilibria (NE) of this game. Note: Instead of listing the pure-strategy NE(s) for each range of c, you may list the range of c for each pure-strategy NE. c) For every value of c (0,3), find all non-pure NE of this game. Show your work. Now suppose that Donald first chooses whether to run, followed by Ted, and then Marco. Each player observes all previous decisions before choosing. d) For what values of c > 0, if any, does there exist a subgame-perfect equilibrium where, on the path of play, only Ted runs? Show your work. If your result differs from the result in the simultaneous case, give an intuition for why that is the case.

5. Consider the following simultaneous-move game: L R T 1,x 3,5 B 2,4 y,6 Find all pairs (x, y) R 2 for which there exists at least one Nash equilibrium (NE) where player 1 s strategy places probability 0.5 on both T and B. (Ideally, your explanation should indicate why pairs (x, y) not included in your answer fail the desired criterion.) 6. Consider the following simultaneous-move game: Top A,w C,y Bottom B,x D,z Suppose A>B and D>C. a) Explain why, if w=y, then G must have infinitely many Nash equilibria. Make sure to clearly identify the equilibria to which you refer. b) Show that if G has only one Nash equilibrium and w>y, then G is dominance solvable. 7. Consider the following two simultaneous-move games: Game A Centre Top 6,-10 12,8 1,9 Middle 7,5 2,1 4,4 Bottom 5,7.5 6,2 4,3 Game B First Second Up 1,1 0,0 Down 0,5 9,9 a) Find every Nash equilibrium, and explain why there are no others: i. In Game A; ii. In Game B. Game C is played in two stages. In stage 1, the players simultaneously play Game A. They then observe the outcome of Game A. In stage 2, they simultaneously play Game B. Each player s payoff is the sum of their stage 1 payoff and δ times their stage 2 payoff. That is, if they get u A from Game A and u B from Game B, their total payoff is u A + δu B. Assume δ > 0. b) If stage 1 and stage 2 represent different time periods, what is δ called? c) Suppose δ = 1. State a subgame-perfect equilibrium of Game C where (Bottom, Centre) is played for sure in stage 1, and explain why your answer is a subgame-perfect equilibrium. d) Let δ* be the lowest value of δ for which there exists a subgame-perfect equilibrium of Game C where (Bottom, Centre) is played for sure in stage 1. i. Find δ*. (Leave your answer as a fraction.) ii. Assuming δ = δ*, state a subgame-perfect equilibrium of Game C where (Bottom, Centre) is played for sure in stage 1.

8. Consider the following stage game, repeated infinitely many times: Up 1,9 6,5 Down 4,3 7,2 a) Show that the above stage game satisfies the definition of a prisoner s dilemma. Let δ [0,1) be player 1 s discount factor, and suppose player 2 plays tit-for-tat every period, while player 1 plays Down in the first period, and tit-for-tat in all other periods. b) What is player 1 s payoff each period? Justify by saying what tit-for-tat means. c) What is player 1 s total discounted payoff? Express your answer as a single fraction (i.e. not as an infinite sum). 9. Consider an infinitely repeated game with observed actions where players have discount factor δ (0,1). The stage game is the following symmetric prisoner s dilemma: C D C 10,10 0,20 D 20,0 3,3 a) Suppose δ = 0.9. Is the following strategy profile a SPE of the infinitely repeated game? Give a full justification for your answer. Both players use the following strategy: Play C in the first stage, and continue playing C as long as the opponent has played C in all previous stages. If the opponent has played D in any previous stage, play D. b) Find all values of δ (0,1) for which there exists an SPE where the outcome is that (C,C) is played at every stage. Show your work, and explain why you found all values. 10. Consider the following simultaneous-move game: Centre Top 10,10 2,8 20,4 Middle 8,2 5,5 20,4 Bottom 4,20 4,20 15,15 a) Find all Nash equilibria in the above game (one-shot, not repeated). b) Suppose the above game is repeated infinitely many times. For which stage-game outcome(s) a is the following strategy profile a subgame-perfect equilibrium for NO (nonnegative) discount factor less than 1 (i.e. for what a is the following never an SPE)? Play a in the first period. Then play a if a was the outcome in all previous stages; otherwise play (Middle, Centre).

11. Consider the following stage game, which we will call G: Up 5,4 1,6 Down 2,8 0,x Assume that both players have discount factor δ = 0.1. x is any real number. After each period, each player s action is revealed, as usual. a) Suppose G is repeated 100 times. Find every subgame-perfect equilibrium. Explain why there are no others (you need to provide the reasoning, not just a fact). b) Suppose G is repeated infinitely many times. Find every subgame-perfect equilibrium. Prove that there are no others. 12. Consider the following two-player simultaneous-move game: L R T 1,1 0,0 B 0,0 0,0 a) Find every Nash equilibrium (NE) of this game, and explain why there are no others. Now consider this two-player simultaneous-move game: both players choose an integer from {0,1,2,3,, n}, where n 1, and receive payoff equal to the lower number chosen. b) Find every NE of this game, and explain why there are no others. Hint: Try to generalize your reasoning from part a. 13. Consider the following five properties of a game: (i) there are exactly two players; (ii) for each player i, there is exactly one information set where player i takes an action; (iii) each player has exactly two possible actions; (iv) there are at least two subgame-perfect Nash equilibria (SPE); (v) all SPEs predict the same outcome, which occurs with 100% probability. a) Draw the extensive form of a game satisfying all properties above. b) Describe as precisely as you can (when players play, payoffs, etc.) the set of all games satisfying all properties above, and explain why they must satisfy your description. (In other words, what things could you change from your answer to part a such that your game would still satisfy properties (i) to (v), and what things could you not change?) Hint: Start by figuring out if the game must be simultaneous-move, sequential, or if it could be either.