NORMAL FORM (SIMULTANEOUS MOVE) GAMES

Similar documents
THEORY: NASH EQUILIBRIUM

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

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

EC3224 Autumn Lecture #02 Nash Equilibrium

Multi-player, non-zero-sum games

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

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

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Dominance

Advanced Microeconomics (Economics 104) Spring 2011 Strategic games I

FIRST PART: (Nash) Equilibria

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

ECON 282 Final Practice Problems

Normal Form Games: A Brief Introduction

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

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

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.

Microeconomics of Banking: Lecture 4

Basic Game Theory. Economics Auction Theory. Instructor: Songzi Du. Simon Fraser University. September 7, 2016

Lecture #3: Networks. Kyumars Sheykh Esmaili

Introduction Economic Models Game Theory Models Games Summary. Syllabus

Mixed Strategies; Maxmin

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

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

Japanese. Sail North. Search Search Search Search

Introduction to Game Theory. František Kopřiva VŠE, Fall 2009

CSC304 Lecture 2. Game Theory (Basic Concepts) CSC304 - Nisarg Shah 1

(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

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

Game theory. Logic and Decision Making Unit 2

Computing Nash Equilibrium; Maxmin

Computational Methods for Non-Cooperative Game Theory

1. Introduction to Game Theory

Noncooperative Games COMP4418 Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

ECO 5341 Strategic Behavior Lecture Notes 3

Dominance Solvable Games

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

Introduction to Game Theory

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

ECO 463. SimultaneousGames

Analyzing Games: Mixed Strategies

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

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

Game Theory. Vincent Kubala

Introduction to Game Theory

Homework 5 Answers PS 30 November 2013

Genetic Algorithms in MATLAB A Selection of Classic Repeated Games from Chicken to the Battle of the Sexes

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

Lecture 6: Basics of Game Theory

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

Introduction to Game Theory I

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

Distributed Optimization and Games

n-person Games in Normal Form

DECISION MAKING GAME THEORY

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

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

ESSENTIALS OF GAME THEORY

Game Theory and Randomized Algorithms

Chapter 3 Learning in Two-Player Matrix Games

CPS 570: Artificial Intelligence Game Theory

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

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

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

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

Dominant and Dominated Strategies

Economics 201A - Section 5

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

EconS Game Theory - Part 1

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.

Exercises for Introduction to Game Theory SOLUTIONS

Solution Concepts 4 Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies

[ Game Theory ] A short primer

Dominance and Best Response. player 2

Minmax and Dominance

Non-Cooperative Game Theory

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

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

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

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium

Advanced Microeconomics: Game Theory

GAME THEORY: STRATEGY AND EQUILIBRIUM

Lecture 10: September 2

Chapter 13. Game Theory

Rationality and Common Knowledge

1 Simultaneous move games of complete information 1

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

Lecture 3: Nash Equilibrium

Introduction to Game Theory

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

Chapter 2 Basics of Game Theory

Game theory Computational Models of Cognition

Student Name. Student ID

Weeks 3-4: Intro to Game Theory

Dominant and Dominated Strategies

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

Distributed Optimization and Games

CSC304: Algorithmic Game Theory and Mechanism Design Fall 2016

Introduction to Game Theory

Introduction to IO. Introduction to IO

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

Transcription:

NORMAL FORM (SIMULTANEOUS MOVE) GAMES 1

For These Games Choices are simultaneous made independently and without observing the other players actions Players have complete information, which means they know the structure of the game, actions, and preferences (both their own and the other players). Such information is common knowledge (all players know that all players know this) 2

Prisoners Dilemma Player 2 () Player 1 () C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 2, 2 How would you play? I need a volunteer. 3

Analysis Player 2 () Player 1 () C D C 3, 0, D 5, 2, How a Rational Actor Would Play: For each of s actions, what is s rational choice? 4

Analysis Player 2 () Player 1 () C D C 3, 0, D 5, 2, How a Rational Actor Would Play: For each of s actions, what is s rational choice? Note: 5 > 3 and 2 > 0. So folks have argue that D is better than C no matter what the other player chooses. Same for player 2. 5

Summary: Prisoner s Dilemma D is a dominant strategy for each player (it is best regardless of what the other player chooses) Individually rational behavior predicts the outcome (D, D). Yet (C, C) is Pareto superior to (D, D) In a sense, (D, D) might be considered individually rational but collectively irrational. C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 2, 2 6

Strict dominance For player 1, strategy s strictly dominates strategy t if u 1 (s,a -i ) > u 1 (t,a -i ) for all a -i where a -i is all the actions of the other player w x y z s 2, 4, 0, -1, t 0, 2, -2, -4, Equivalently, strategy t is strictly dominated by strategy s. 7

Strict dominance Strategy s is a strictly dominant strategy for player 1 if u 1 (s,a -i ) > u 1 (t,a -i ), u 1 (s,a -i ) > u 1 (r,a -i ),... for all of 1 s possible actions, t, r, etc. and for all a -i w x y z s 2, 4, 0, -1, t 0, 2, -2, -4, r 1, 3, -1, -2, Equivalently, s is strictly dominant if it strictly dominates all other strategies 8

Strict dominance Strictly dominant strategy always a best response Strictly dominated strategy never a best response Alternative solution concept: iterated dominance Iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies I will refer to the outcomes that remain after an iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies as a strictly dominant strategy equilibria (SDSE). Game is dominance solvable if the SDSE is unique Nash equilibria, coming soon, are a subset of action profiles that survive iterated elimination 9

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Rule of thumb: When eliminating rows, look only at row s payoffs. When eliminating columns, look only at column s payoffs. 10

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 11

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Middle dominates up, because 2>1, 1>0, and 4>2. So we can eliminate up. 12

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate columns. 13

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate columns. 14

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate columns. Left dominates right because 2>1 and 3>2. 15

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate columns. Left dominates right because 2>1 and 3>2. 16

Example: Iterated dominance Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate rows again. 17

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate rows again. Down dominates middle because 3>2 and 2>1. 18

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 Now try to eliminate columns again. Left dominates center because 3>1. 19

Example: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies Left Center Right Up 1, 1 0, 1 2, 4 Middle 2, 2 1, 3 4, 1 Down 3, 3 2, 1 1, 2 SDSE = {Down, Left} because a single outcome remains, we call the game dominance solvable. 20

Practice: Iterated elimination of dominated strategies x y z A 2, 3-16, 2 5, 0 B 5, 6 4, 6 6, 4 C 8, 0 3, 10 1, 8 21

Nash equilibrium Informally, a Nash equilibrium is an action profile such that no player has a unilateral incentive to deviate (holding all other players choices constant, each player s choice is rational) 22

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 How do I find Nash equilibria? Determine the best responses, that is the best action (or strategy) for a player given the actions (or strategies) played by opponents. The best responses for each player intersect at the Nash equilibrium. 23

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for? 24

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for? D because 5 > 3. 25

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays C, what is best response for? D because 5 > 3. Let s circle 5 because it indicates one of the best responses. 26

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for? 27

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for? D because 1 > 0. 28

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given column plays D, what is best response for? D because 1 > 0. Let s circle 1 because it indicates one of the best responses. 29

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays C, what is best response for? 30

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays C, what is best response for? D because 5 > 3. 31

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays C, what is best response for? D because 5 > 3. Let s circle 5 because it indicates one of the best responses. 32

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays D, what is best response for? 33

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays D, what is best response for? D because 1 > 0. 34

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Given plays D, what is best response for? D because 1 > 0. Let s circle 1 because it indicates one of the best responses. 35

Nash Equilibrium: PD C D C 3, 3 0, 5 D 5, 0 1, 1 Where the best responses intersect {D,D} is a Nash Equilbrium. N.E. = {D,D} Note: equilibria are always stated in terms of strategies (or actions), never in terms of payoffs in the outcomes. 36

Remarks An action profile is not a Nash equilibrium when at least one player has an incentive to unilaterally deviate (because the criterion is individual rationality, joint deviations are irrelevant) An incentive to deviate means that utility from another action must be strictly better than in the candidate action profile (indifferent between two different actions giving the highest utility) A Nash equilibrium is a stable outcome in the sense that it is self-enforcing 37

Practice: Nash Equilibrium x y z A 2, 3-16, 2 5, 0 B 5, 6 4, 6 6, 4 C 8, 0 3, 10 1, 8 38

The story Two hunters Stag hunt Capturing a stag requires joint effort A hare can be captured with individual effort Hunting the stag and a hare are mutually exclusive The stag is more valuable than the hare, which is still better than nothing How would we fill in actions and payoffs in matrix? 39

The story Two hunters Stag hunt Capturing a stag requires joint effort A hare can be captured with individual effort Hunting the stag and a hare are mutually exclusive The stag is more valuable than the hare, which is still better than nothing What is SDSE? What is NE? 40

Battle of the Sexes The story Husband and wife Choice of two activities: Ballet, Sports Wife prefers sports, husband prefers ballet Both prefer being together to being apart each gets zero if they are apart. Husband Wife How would we fill in actions and payoffs in matrix? 41

Battle of the Sexes The story Husband and wife Choice of two activities: Ballet, Sports Wife prefers sports, husband prefers ballet Both prefer being together to being apart each gets zero if they are apart. Husband Wife What is NE? What is SDSE 42

Matching Pennies The game Each player chooses Heads or Tails wins if choices match, looses if they differ. wins if choices differ, looses if they match. How would we fill in actions and payoffs in matrix? 43

Matching Pennies The game Each player chooses Heads or Tails wins if choices match, looses if they differ. wins if choices differ, looses if they match. What is NE? What is SDSE? 44

Application: Battle of the Bismarck Sea This is a zero-sum game, which we will analyze using the concepts we already know. 45

Application: Battle of the Bismarck Sea The story 46

Application: Battle of the Bismarck Sea Normal Form Game Kimura Kenney North South North 2 2 ssouth 1 3 Kenney Kimura North South North 2, -2 2, -2 ssouth 1, -1 3, -3 What is NE? What is SDSE? 47

Application: Battle of the Bismarck Sea Historical Outcome: Keeney searched north. Kimura sailed north. Allies bombed the convoy for three days. Of the 7,000 Japanese troops, only 800 reached Lae. Only 13 allies were killed with the loss of 6 small planes. 48

Interpretation of multiple equilibria All Nash equilibria are stable and consistent with individually rational behavior. Nash equilibrium does not predict which equilibrium will be the outcome nor does it explain how players actions settle on action profiles. It only tells us that once players actions settle on a Nash equilibrium profile, they have no incentive to change their behavior. 49

Strategic games Players Actions for each player Preferences over action profiles Summary Nash equilibrium Action profile such that no player has a unilateral incentive to deviate Predicts stable outcomes, but may not be unique Key skills to develop Translating verbal theories or models into strategic games Determine whether an action profile is a SDSE Determine whether an action profile is a Nash equilibrium 50