THEORY: NASH EQUILIBRIUM

Similar documents
NORMAL FORM (SIMULTANEOUS MOVE) GAMES

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

ECON 282 Final Practice Problems

EC3224 Autumn Lecture #02 Nash Equilibrium

CS510 \ Lecture Ariel Stolerman

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

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

Advanced Microeconomics (Economics 104) Spring 2011 Strategic games I

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.

FIRST PART: (Nash) Equilibria

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

Microeconomics of Banking: Lecture 4

ECO 463. SimultaneousGames

Introduction to Game Theory

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

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

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

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

Game Theory ( nd term) Dr. S. Farshad Fatemi. Graduate School of Management and Economics Sharif University of Technology.

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

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Dominance

February 11, 2015 :1 +0 (1 ) = :2 + 1 (1 ) =3 1. is preferred to R iff

Introduction to (Networked) Game Theory. Networked Life NETS 112 Fall 2016 Prof. Michael Kearns

Game Theory and Algorithms Lecture 3: Weak Dominance and Truthfulness

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

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

1. Introduction to Game Theory

Introduction to (Networked) Game Theory. Networked Life NETS 112 Fall 2014 Prof. Michael Kearns

Economics 201A - Section 5

Introduction to Game Theory

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

Game Theory. Department of Electronics EL-766 Spring Hasan Mahmood

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

Game theory. Logic and Decision Making Unit 2

Sequential Games When there is a sufficient lag between strategy choices our previous assumption of simultaneous moves may not be realistic. In these

Advanced Microeconomics: Game Theory

CHAPTER LEARNING OUTCOMES. By the end of this section, students will be able to:

Introduction to Game Theory

Prisoner 2 Confess Remain Silent Confess (-5, -5) (0, -20) Remain Silent (-20, 0) (-1, -1)

3 Game Theory II: Sequential-Move and Repeated Games

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

Lecture 6: Basics of Game Theory

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

Dynamic Games: Backward Induction and Subgame Perfection

Multi-player, non-zero-sum games

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

(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

Chapter 13. Game Theory

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

Extensive Games with Perfect Information A Mini Tutorial

n-person Games in Normal Form

DYNAMIC GAMES. Lecture 6

Exercises for Introduction to Game Theory SOLUTIONS

Backward Induction and Stackelberg Competition

GOLDEN AND SILVER RATIOS IN BARGAINING

Introduction Economic Models Game Theory Models Games Summary. Syllabus

International Economics B 2. Basics in noncooperative game theory

Homework 5 Answers PS 30 November 2013

Games. Episode 6 Part III: Dynamics. Baochun Li Professor Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Toronto

NORMAL FORM GAMES: invariance and refinements DYNAMIC GAMES: extensive form

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

Strategies and Game Theory

Appendix A A Primer in Game Theory

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

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

Dominant and Dominated Strategies

Chapter 30: Game Theory

Lecture 5: Subgame Perfect Equilibrium. November 1, 2006

CSC304: Algorithmic Game Theory and Mechanism Design Fall 2016

GAME THEORY: STRATEGY AND EQUILIBRIUM

Lecture #3: Networks. Kyumars Sheykh Esmaili

Normal Form Games: A Brief Introduction

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

Simultaneous Move Games

Session Outline. Application of Game Theory in Economics. Prof. Trupti Mishra, School of Management, IIT Bombay

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

Chapter 3 Learning in Two-Player Matrix Games

Introduction: What is Game Theory?

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

Solution Concepts 4 Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies

4. Game Theory: Introduction

Non-Cooperative Game Theory

37 Game Theory. Bebe b1 b2 b3. a Abe a a A Two-Person Zero-Sum Game

Mixed Strategies; Maxmin

CMU-Q Lecture 20:

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

Introduction to Game Theory

Believing when Credible: Talking about Future Plans and Past Actions

8.F The Possibility of Mistakes: Trembling Hand Perfection

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

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

Distributed Optimization and Games

LECTURE 26: GAME THEORY 1

UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Game Theory I (PR 5) The main ideas

ECO 5341 Strategic Behavior Lecture Notes 3

Computational Methods for Non-Cooperative Game Theory

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

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

Lecture 10: September 2

Transcription:

THEORY: NASH EQUILIBRIUM 1

The Story Prisoner s Dilemma Two prisoners held in separate rooms. Authorities offer a reduced sentence to each prisoner if he rats out his friend. If a prisoner is ratted out by the other guy, then he receives a harsh sentence. If he rats out the other guy, then he receives a lighter sentence. 2

Matrix representation Player 2 (Column) Player 1 (Row) C D C 2, 2 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Numbers are utility, not years. Hence, larger numbers are more preferred. I need a volunteer 3

Model of a strategic game A strategic (or normal form) game consists of: A set of players, denoted by N = {1,,n}, For every player i N, a set of strategies S i = {s 1, s 2,, s k }, The set of strategy profiles S S i, which are the possible outcomes of the game, For every player, preferences over the set of strategy profiles: 4

Matrix representation Set of Players: {player 1, player 2}. Player 1 (Row) C Player 2 (Column) D C 2, 2 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Set of Strategies for player 1: {C, D}. Player 1 s preferences for the strategy profiles (in utility). Set of Strategies Profiles: {(C,C),(C,D),(D,C),(D,D)} 5

Model of a strategic game More on strategy profiles: For any strategy profile we will use the notation s -i to denote the strategies adopted by all players except player i, that is s = (s i, s -i ). Utility Functions: A utility function for player i is a function the represents the player s preferences over the strategy profiles. 6

Definition: Common Knowledge A fact is common knowledge if all of the players know it, and all of the players know that all of the players know it, etc. Rationality: We assume that it is common knowledge among all players that they are rational. That is, they want to get the outcomes they prefer most among the ones they can actually attain. 7

Time Remarks Time is absent from strategic form games. Players cannot make their actions contingent on the actions of other players, perhaps because Players act simultaneously, Players are not informed about the previous moves of the other players. Information We are currently assuming players have complete information. They know the structure of the game, the strategies available, and the preferences of all players. The last assumption will be relaxed when we get to Bayesian Subgame Perfect Equilibrium. 8

Stag Hunt Player 2 (Column) Player 1 (Row) S H S 3, 3 0, 1 H 1, 0 1, 1 Extra credit on HW2. I m going to randomly match you with someone in the room. Imagine you are row. How would you play this game? 9

Chicken Player 2 (Column) Player 1 (Row) S H S 2, 2 1, 3 H 3, 1-1, -1 How would two rational actors play this game? 10

Definition Solution Concepts A solution concept is a tool for making a prediction about how rational players are going to play a game. It identifies some strategy profile as more plausible than others. Desirable Properties of Solution Concepts Existence: the concept should apply to a wide class of games. Exclusivity: the concept should narrow down the list of strategy profiles. Robustness: small changes in the game should not affect the prediction made by the solution concept. 11

Informal definition Nash equilibrium A Nash equilibrium (NE) is a strategy profile such that no player has a unilateral incentive to deviate (if the strategies of all the other players are held constant, no player would like to change his/her strategy). Formal definition A strategy profile is a Nash Equilibrium in a strategic form game G if and only if 12

Example: PD Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 {D;D} is a Nash Equilibrium in this game, because neither player has a unilateral incentive to deviate. 13

Remarks Indifference keeps a player in equilibrium. In order to have an incentive to deviate a player s utility from another action must be strictly better than s*. A Nash equilibrium is a stable outcome in the sense that it is self-enforcing. There may be multiple Nash equilibria in a game. Nash equilibria are not necessarily efficient. All players may unanimously prefer another outcome to a Nash Equilibrium. 14

Definition Best Response Function The best response function for player i is defined by Theorem A strategy profile s* is a NE if and only if Implication We can use the best response function to identify Nash Equilbria. Nash Equilibria occur where the best response functions for all the players intersect. 15

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 How do I find Nash equilibria? Determine the best responses, that is the best strategy for a player given the strategies played by opponents. The best responses for each player intersect at the Nash equilibrium. 16

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for Row? 17

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for Row? C because 3 > 2. 18

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for Row? C because 3 > 2. Let s circle 3 because it indicates one of the best responses. 19

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for Row? 20

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for Row? D because 1 > 0. 21

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for Row? D because 1 > 0. Let s circle 1 because it indicates one of the best responses. 22

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays C, what is best response for Column? 23

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays C, what is best response for Column? C because 3 > 2. 24

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays C, what is best response for Column? C because 3 > 2. Let s circle 3 because it indicates one of the best responses. 25

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays D, what is best response for Column? 26

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays D, what is best response for Column? D because 1 > 0. 27

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Given Row plays D, what is best response for Column? D because 1 > 0. Let s circle 1 because it indicates one of the best responses. 28

Nash Equilibrium Column Row C D C 3, 3 0, 2 D 2, 0 1, 1 Where the best responses intersect {C;C} and {D;D} are Nash Equilbria. N.E. = {C;C} and {D;D} Note: equilibria are always stated in terms of strategies, never in terms of payoffs. 29

Practice: Chicken Player 2 (Column) Player 1 (Row) S H S 2, 2 1, 3 H 3, 1-1, -1 What s the Nash Equilibrium in this game? Hint: use best responses 30

Practice: Nash Equilibrium Column x y z A 2, 3-16, 2 5, 0 Row B 5, 6 4, 6 6, 4 C 8, 0 3, 10 1, 8 31

Practice 2: Nash Equilibrium Column None Some All All 0, 20 5, 15 10, 10 Row Some 1, 3 4, 4 15, 5 None 2, 2 3, 1 20, 0 32

Continuous Strategies Row s best response to Column. Column s best response to Row. 1 Column 0 1 Row 0 Rather than making a discrete choice to contribute a none, some, or all, we could consider making a continuous choice between 0 (none), 1 (all), and everything in between. Continuous strategies are common in spatial voting models. 33

Description of the Game Exercise 42.2 (A Joint Project) Two people are working on a joint project (like a group homework assignment). Each person must chose an effort level Effort costs The benefit of their efforts is which is split equally among them. Utility Functions The utility for each individual is: 34

Exercise 42.2 (A Joint Project) Find Best Response Functions: First, maximize player 1 s utility with respect to her effort: Solving the first order condition (FOC) for x 1 (i.e., setting the derivate equal to 0 and solving for x 1 ) yields the best response for player 1 to player 2 s choice effort: Symmetrically, the best response function for player 2 is: 35

Exercise 42.2 (A Joint Project) Nash Equilibrium: In equilibrium, both players must be playing a best response to the other player s effort level. Mathematically, it must be that: Substituting yields: This implies 36

Exercise 42.2 (A Joint Project) N.E. 37

Application: Electoral competition Baseline model: Office-motivated candidates Hotelling (1929), Downs (1957) Two candidates choose policy platforms Platforms credibly translate into policy outcomes Candidates care only about winning they prefer wining to tying to losing Voters Care about policy outcomes Single-peaked and symmetric preferences Continuous distribution of voters with median m Voters are non-strategic 38

Baseline model: Office Motivated Candidates Players Candidates, N = {1, 2} Strategies Platforms, Preferences 1 if x1 m < x2 m u1( x1, x2) = 0 if x1 m = x2 m 1 if x1 m > x2 m 1 if x1 m > x2 m u2( x1, x2) = 0 if x1 m = x2 m 1 if x1 m < x2 m Note: continuous strategies, but not continuous payoffs. Hence, we won t use first derivatives. 39

Nash equilibrium Proposition (m, m) is the unique Nash equilibrium Proof Step 1. Show that (m, m) is a NE 40

Nash equilibrium Step 2. Show that no other (x 1, x 2 ) is a NE 41

Best response functions for player 1 Case1. x 2 < m Case 2. x 2 = m Case 3. x 2 > m 42

Strategic games Summary Players Strategies for each player Preferences over strategy profiles Nash equilibrium Strategy profile such that no player has a unilateral incentive to deviate Best Response Functions (for both discrete and continuous strategies) Predicts stable outcomes, but may not be unique 43