Econ 414 Midterm Exam

Similar documents
B w x y z a 4,4 3,3 5,1 2,2 b 3,6 2,5 6,-3 1,4 A c -2,0 2,-1 0,0 2,1 d 1,4 1,2 1,1 3,5

S 2,2-1, x c C x r, 1 0,0

Not 0,4 2,1. i. Show there is a perfect Bayesian equilibrium where player A chooses to play, player A chooses L, and player B chooses L.

The Nash equilibrium of the stage game is (D, R), giving payoffs (0, 0). Consider the trigger strategies:

Econ 711 Homework 1 Solutions

The Ohio State University Department of Economics Second Midterm Examination Answers

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications Final Exam Ronaldo Carpio Jan. 13, 2015

MKTG 555: Marketing Models

Economics 171: Final Exam

AS/ECON 2350 S2 N Answers to Mid term Exam July time : 1 hour. Do all 4 questions. All count equally.

Answer Key: Problem Set 4

Answers to Problem Set 4

ECON 803: MICROECONOMIC THEORY II Arthur J. Robson Fall 2016 Assignment 9 (due in class on November 22)

1 R. 2 l r 1 1 l2 r 2

Econ 302 Assignment 3 Solution. a 2bQ c = 0, which is the monopolist s optimal quantity; the associated price is. P (Q) = a b

Chapter 11: Dynamic Games and First and Second Movers

Exercises Solutions: Oligopoly

Econ 101A Final exam May 14, 2013.

Game Theory: Additional Exercises

Eco AS , J. Sandford, spring 2019 March 9, Midterm answers

MIDTERM ANSWER KEY GAME THEORY, ECON 395

Econ 101A Final exam May 14, 2013.

Simon Fraser University Spring 2014

Game Theory with Applications to Finance and Marketing, I

Economics 109 Practice Problems 1, Vincent Crawford, Spring 2002

Introduction to Industrial Organization Professor: Caixia Shen Fall 2014 Lecture Note 5 Games and Strategy (Ch. 4)

(a) (5 points) Suppose p = 1. Calculate all the Nash Equilibria of the game. Do/es the equilibrium/a that you have found maximize social utility?

Today. Applications of NE and SPNE Auctions English Auction Second-Price Sealed-Bid Auction First-Price Sealed-Bid Auction

Econ 101A Final exam Th 15 December. Do not turn the page until instructed to.

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications, Lecture 9

Player two accepts or rejects. If player 2 accepts, they split the pie. Otherwise, player 2 gets r 2 and player 1 gets r 1, where r 1 +r 2 < 1.

The Ohio State University Department of Economics Econ 601 Prof. James Peck Extra Practice Problems Answers (for final)

Microeconomics II. CIDE, MsC Economics. List of Problems

Game Theory. Important Instructions

Problem Set 2 - SOLUTIONS

Ph.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program June 2017

M.Phil. Game theory: Problem set II. These problems are designed for discussions in the classes of Week 8 of Michaelmas term. 1

Problem 3 Solutions. l 3 r, 1

ECE 586BH: Problem Set 5: Problems and Solutions Multistage games, including repeated games, with observed moves

Microeconomic Theory II Preliminary Examination Solutions Exam date: August 7, 2017

Dynamic Games. Econ 400. University of Notre Dame. Econ 400 (ND) Dynamic Games 1 / 18

Duopoly models Multistage games with observed actions Subgame perfect equilibrium Extensive form of a game Two-stage prisoner s dilemma

Notes for Section: Week 4

Microeconomics I. Undergraduate Programs in Business Administration and Economics

Simon Fraser University Fall Econ 302 D200 Final Exam Solution Instructor: Songzi Du Wednesday December 16, 2015, 8:30 11:30 AM

ECO 5341 (Section 2) Spring 2016 Midterm March 24th 2016 Total Points: 100

Econ 323 Microeconomic Theory. Chapter 10, Question 1

PRISONER S DILEMMA. Example from P-R p. 455; also 476-7, Price-setting (Bertrand) duopoly Demand functions

Exercises Solutions: Game Theory

Solution Problem Set 2

Université du Maine Théorie des Jeux Yves Zenou Correction de l examen du 16 décembre 2013 (1 heure 30)

Final Examination December 14, Economics 5010 AF3.0 : Applied Microeconomics. time=2.5 hours

When one firm considers changing its price or output level, it must make assumptions about the reactions of its rivals.

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

In reality; some cases of prisoner s dilemma end in cooperation. Game Theory Dr. F. Fatemi Page 219

Name. Answers Discussion Final Exam, Econ 171, March, 2012

Economic Management Strategy: Hwrk 1. 1 Simultaneous-Move Game Theory Questions.

There are 10 questions on this exam. These 10 questions are independent of each other.

Repeated Games. Econ 400. University of Notre Dame. Econ 400 (ND) Repeated Games 1 / 48

Francesco Nava Microeconomic Principles II EC202 Lent Term 2010

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

Introduction to Game Theory

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Repeated Games

Lecture 6 Dynamic games with imperfect information

Econ 323 Microeconomic Theory. Practice Exam 2 with Solutions

Name: Midterm #1 EconS 425 (February 20 th, 2015)

HW Consider the following game:

Ph.D. MICROECONOMICS CORE EXAM August 2018

Microeconomic Theory II Preliminary Examination Solutions Exam date: June 5, 2017

Prisoner s dilemma with T = 1

REPEATED GAMES. MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell. Frank Cowell: Repeated Games. Almost essential Game Theory: Dynamic.

PhD Qualifier Examination

ECE 586GT: Problem Set 1: Problems and Solutions Analysis of static games

14.12 Game Theory Midterm II 11/15/ Compute all the subgame perfect equilibria in pure strategies for the following game:

Follow the Leader I has three pure strategy Nash equilibria of which only one is reasonable.

Microeconomic Theory August 2013 Applied Economics. Ph.D. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION MICROECONOMIC THEORY. Applied Economics Graduate Program

ECON106P: Pricing and Strategy

ECO410H: Practice Questions 2 SOLUTIONS

Microeconomic Theory III Final Exam March 18, 2010 (80 Minutes)

Exercise Chapter 10

Name. FINAL EXAM, Econ 171, March, 2015

MA300.2 Game Theory 2005, LSE

Math 152: Applicable Mathematics and Computing

University at Albany, State University of New York Department of Economics Ph.D. Preliminary Examination in Microeconomics, June 20, 2017

Extensive-Form Games with Imperfect Information

1 Solutions to Homework 3

An introduction on game theory for wireless networking [1]

1 x i c i if x 1 +x 2 > 0 u i (x 1,x 2 ) = 0 if x 1 +x 2 = 0

Problem 3,a. ds 1 (s 2 ) ds 2 < 0. = (1+t)

Topics in Contract Theory Lecture 1

Solution to Tutorial 1

Solution to Tutorial /2013 Semester I MA4264 Game Theory

Econ 101A Final Exam We May 9, 2012.

Midterm #2 EconS 527 [November 7 th, 2016]

Introductory Microeconomics

Finitely repeated simultaneous move game.

Sequential-move games with Nature s moves.

Warm Up Finitely Repeated Games Infinitely Repeated Games Bayesian Games. Repeated Games

LECTURE NOTES ON GAME THEORY. Player 2 Cooperate Defect Cooperate (10,10) (-1,11) Defect (11,-1) (0,0)

GAME THEORY: DYNAMIC. MICROECONOMICS Principles and Analysis Frank Cowell. Frank Cowell: Dynamic Game Theory

Transcription:

Econ 44 Midterm Exam Name: There are three questions taken from the material covered so far in the course. All questions are equally weighted. If you have a question, please raise your hand and I will come to your desk. Make sure that you defend your answers with economic reasoning mathematical arguments, and show that you are using the crect game theetic concepts by identifying the equilibria explicitly. Good luck.

. Consider the following game in strategic fm: B w x y z a 4,4 3,3 5,, b 3,6,5 6,-3,4 A c -,0,- 0,0, d,4,, 3,5 (i.) Perfm iterated deletion of strictly dominated strategies (Strike them out with a line, writing the letter of the dominant strategy beside it). (ii.) Find all pure-strategy Nash equilibria (Circle them clearly). (iii.) Is there a mixed strategy equilibrium in this game? If so, find the mixed strategy f the row player. i. Round : w strictly dominates x f the column player; y strictly dominated by z f the column player; a strictly dominates b f the row player. Round : Nothing else can be deleted; stop. ii. (a, w) and (d, z) are pure-strategy Nash equilibria. iii. Yes. First we do IDWDS and remove c f the row player, since it is weakly dominated by a. Then we choose (σ a,σ d ) to make the column player indifferent between w and z: σ a 4+σ d 4 = σ a +5σ d σ a = σ d and we know σ a + σ d =, so that 3σ a =. Then Row s equilibrium strategy is σ a = /3 and σ d = /3.

. Consider the following game in extensive fm: a b L e M f R c d,,5,, 3,3 3, (i.) Write all behavi strategies f all players. (ii.) Write the game in strategic fm and solve f all pure-strategy Nash equilibria. (iii.) Find all sub-game perfect equilibria. (iv.) If there are any Nash equilibria ( me than one) that fail to be sub-game perfect, choose one and briefly explain why this failure occurs. i. Player : L, M, R. Player : aec, aed, afc, afd, bec, bed, bfc, bfd ii. aec aed afc afd bec bed bfc bfd L -,- -*,- -,- -,-,5* *,5*,5* *,5* M -,* -*,*,- *,- -,* -,*,- *,- R 3*,3* -3,- 3*,3* -3,- 3*,3* -3,- 3*,3* -3,- So we have (R,aec), (M,aed), (R,afc), (R,bec), (L,bed), (R,bfc), and (L,bfd) as pure-strategy Nash equilibria. iii. Doing backwards induction, we find the only SPNE is (R,bec) iv. The Nash equilibrium (L,bed) is not subgame perfect because it relies on player believing that player would ever choose d if R was played; this is a non-credible threat. Since c gives a strictly higher payoff to player, player should conclude that player would always choose d, and that it is safe to player R and get 3 rather than from L. 3

3. Splitting the Gains from Merger There are two firms that compete in a Cournot market. In particular, they choose quantities q and q simultaneously to maximize their profits. The market price is P(q,q ) = A q q. They have no costs. (i.) Solve f the Nash equilibrium of the game. Sketch the firms reaction function/best-response functions. Does the game exhibit strategic complements substitutes? How do the equilibrium strategies change if A increases? (ii.) What are profits f one of the firms in this industry (call this π c )? How much would a monopolist produce, and what are its profits (call this π m )? Assume A = 6 (iii). Assume the owners of the two firms consider merging, and have to bargain over the gains from merging, π = π m π c. Assume firm one makes the first offer and both firms discount at rate δ. Firm one gets to make one offer, and firm two gets to make one counter-offer. After a rejection, discount all later pay-offs. If agreement isn t reached, they continue as Cournot duopolists. Fill in the following extensive fm with pay-offs and solve f the sub-game perfect Nash equilibrium:, x y,, i. (Step ) The players payoffs are π = (A q q )q and π = (A q q )q (Step ) Now we maximize with respect to what each player controls, and solve f best-response functions π = A q q = 0 q = A q q π = A q q = 0 q = A q q This is a game of strategic substitutes, because each player s strategy is decreasing in the other player s strategy: dq = dq = dq dq The graph is identical to the usual Cournot graph, with c = 0. 4

(Step 3) Solving simultaneously yields the Nash equilibrium q = q = A 3 The strategies are increasing in A, since it appears positively in the numerat. ii. The profits f a single firm are π c = (A (A/3))(A/3) = A /9 A monopolist would maximize (A q)q q m = A and monopoly profits are π m = A /4 iii. x x, A /4 x y δy, δ( A 4 y) δ A 9, δa 9 The SPNE is In the last period, firm accepts only if And rejects otherwise. Then player solves δy δ A 9 y A 9 maxδ(a /4 y) y subject to y A 9. So player wants to keep y as small as possible, y = A /9. 5

Then player accepts player s first offer only if A /4 x δ(a /4 A /9) and player rejects otherwise. Then player solves A 4 ( δ)+δa 9 x maxx x subject to A 4 ( δ)+δa x. Since player wants to maximize his payoff x, he picks the 9 largest x possible, x = A 4 ( δ)+δa 9 The above offers and counter-offers are the subgame perfect Nash equilibrium. 6