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

Similar documents
Problem 3 Solutions. l 3 r, 1

Answer Key: Problem Set 4

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

FDPE Microeconomics 3 Spring 2017 Pauli Murto TA: Tsz-Ning Wong (These solution hints are based on Julia Salmi s solution hints for Spring 2015.

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

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

Economics 502 April 3, 2008

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

Simon Fraser University Spring 2014

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

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

Game Theory. Important Instructions

ECON/MGEC 333 Game Theory And Strategy Problem Set 9 Solutions. Levent Koçkesen January 6, 2011

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

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

HW Consider the following game:

Player 2 L R M H a,a 7,1 5,0 T 0,5 5,3 6,6

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

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications, Lecture 9

CHAPTER 14: REPEATED PRISONER S DILEMMA

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

Econ 101A Final exam May 14, 2013.

MA300.2 Game Theory 2005, LSE

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

Exercises Solutions: Oligopoly

Game Theory. Wolfgang Frimmel. Repeated Games

1 R. 2 l r 1 1 l2 r 2

13.1 Infinitely Repeated Cournot Oligopoly

Extensive-Form Games with Imperfect Information

EconS 424 Strategy and Game Theory. Homework #5 Answer Key

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

Econ 414 Midterm Exam

ECONS 424 STRATEGY AND GAME THEORY MIDTERM EXAM #2 ANSWER KEY

Econ 101A Final exam May 14, 2013.

Economics 171: Final Exam

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

Repeated Games with Perfect Monitoring

University of Hong Kong ECON6036 Stephen Chiu. Extensive Games with Perfect Information II. Outline

Repeated Games. EC202 Lectures IX & X. Francesco Nava. January London School of Economics. Nava (LSE) EC202 Lectures IX & X Jan / 16

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.

FDPE Microeconomics 3 Spring 2017 Pauli Murto TA: Tsz-Ning Wong (These solution hints are based on Julia Salmi s solution hints for Spring 2015.

Econ 101A Final exam Mo 18 May, 2009.

ECON106P: Pricing and Strategy

Repeated Games. September 3, Definitions: Discounting, Individual Rationality. Finitely Repeated Games. Infinitely Repeated Games

Answers to Microeconomics Prelim of August 24, In practice, firms often price their products by marking up a fixed percentage over (average)

Game Theory with Applications to Finance and Marketing, I

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

Introduction to Game Theory Lecture Note 5: Repeated Games

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

Economics 209A Theory and Application of Non-Cooperative Games (Fall 2013) Repeated games OR 8 and 9, and FT 5

1 Solutions to Homework 4

Noncooperative Oligopoly

Game Theory: Additional Exercises

Econ 101A Final Exam We May 9, 2012.

EC487 Advanced Microeconomics, Part I: Lecture 9

Economics 431 Infinitely repeated games

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

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

Early PD experiments

is the best response of firm 1 to the quantity chosen by firm 2. Firm 2 s problem: Max Π 2 = q 2 (a b(q 1 + q 2 )) cq 2

Microeconomics III. Oligopoly prefacetogametheory (Mar 11, 2012) School of Economics The Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), Herzliya

Chapter 11: Dynamic Games and First and Second Movers

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

Lecture 6 Dynamic games with imperfect information

Exercises Solutions: Game Theory

UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2012

Introduction to Political Economy Problem Set 3

Answers to Problem Set 4

Introduction to Game Theory

In the Name of God. Sharif University of Technology. Graduate School of Management and Economics

ECON402: Practice Final Exam Solutions

Lecture 5 Leadership and Reputation

Answer Key to Midterm Exam. February

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

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

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

EconS 424 Strategy and Game Theory. Homework #5 Answer Key

(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?

1 Solutions to Homework 3

Chapter 8. Repeated Games. Strategies and payoffs for games played twice

14.12 Game Theory - Midterm I 10/13/2011

Econ 711 Homework 1 Solutions

MIDTERM ANSWER KEY GAME THEORY, ECON 395

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

Infinitely Repeated Games

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

ECO410H: Practice Questions 2 SOLUTIONS

Microeconomics of Banking: Lecture 5

Notes for Section: Week 4

Problem Set 2 Answers

Repeated Games. Debraj Ray, October 2006

February 23, An Application in Industrial Organization

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

Department of Agricultural Economics. PhD Qualifier Examination. August 2010

In Class Exercises. Problem 1

ECO 301 MACROECONOMIC THEORY UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS FALL 2008 Instructor: Dr. S. Nuray Akin MIDTERM EXAM I

Outline for Dynamic Games of Complete Information

Econ 101A Final exam Mo 19 May, 2008.

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

Transcription:

Midterm answers Instructions: You may use a calculator and scratch paper, but no other resources. In particular, you may not discuss the exam with anyone other than the instructor, and you may not access the Internet, your notes, or books during the exam. You have 150 minutes to complete the exam. Good luck! Questions 1-2 pertain to the game in Figure 1: Player 1 Player 2 L R U 10,10 4,50 D 50,4 0,0 Figure 1: Problems 1 and 2 of this exam refer to this normal form game. Problem 1 (20 points) Consider the game in Figure 1: a. Find all Nash equilibrium strategies, pure as well as mixed. There are three NE: (D, L), (U, R), and ( 1 U + 10 D, 1 L + 10 R). b. For each of the Nash equilibria you solved for in a, state the payoff received by each player. Payoffs are (50, 4), (4, 50), and ( 50, 50 ), respectively. c. Solve for each player s minmax payoff. Also state the strategy each player uses to minmax his/her opponent. The minmax payoff for each player is 4. To minmax player 2, player 1 plays D, while to minmax player 1, player 2 plays R. d. Now suppose the game is played sequentially, with player 1 choosing his strategy first, and player 2 observing 1 s choice prior to choosing her strategy. Solve for all subgame perfect equilibria of this game. In the unique SPE, 1 plays D, while 2 plays L if 1 plays D, and R if 1 plays U. SPE payoffs are (50, 4). Problem 2 (20 points) Now, suppose the game in Figure 1 is played repeatedly ad infinitum, with both players sharing a discount factor δ (0, 1). a. What is the minimum value of δ for which (U, L) is sustainable in a SPE using grim trigger Nash reversion strategies? The only NE that will work as a punishment is the symmetric mixed equilibrium, in which both players receive a payoff of 50 in each period. For neither player to wish to deviate from (U, L), we must have: 10 50 + δ 50 δ 22 25 =.88

Now, consider a carrot and stick strategy, in which (U, L) is played initially, and players switch to (D, R) for T periods following any deviation from (U, L). If anything other than (D, R) is played during the punishment phase, the punishment restarts, meaning that (D, R) is played for an additional T periods. After T periods of (D, R), the game restarts at (U, L). b. What condition on δ and T must hold for neither player to wish to deviate from (U, L) in phase 1 of the game? 10 50 + 10δT +1 +1 T 5 c. What condition on δ and T must hold for neither player to wish to deviate from (D, R) in phase 2 of the game? δ T.4 d. Suppose δ =.9. Go as far as you can in determining for which values for T do the carrot and stick strategies comprise a subgame perfect equilibrium. T must be between 6 and 8, inclusive. e. Describe in intuitive terms, why carrot and stick strategies fail SPE equilibrium conditions if T is very small or very large. If T is large, following through with the punishment is unappealing. Thus, players are likely to deviate from the punishment path, and so the punishment is non-credible. But this makes players willing to deviate from phase 1 of the game. If T is too small, then the punishment is not severe enough to deter players from pursuing a short-run gain by deviating from phase 1 of the games. Problem 3 (20 points) Two players must divide a surplus of one million dollars. Suppose they play the following bargaining game: Period 1: Player 1 makes an offer to player 2 on how to divide the million dollars. If 2 accepts, the game ends. If 2 rejects the offer, the game moves to period 2. Period 2: Player 2 makes an offer to player 1 on how to divide the million dollars. If 1 accepts, the game ends. If 1 rejects the offer, the game moves to period 3. Period 3: Player 1 makes an offer to player 2 on how to divide the million dollars. If 2 accepts, the game ends. If 2 rejects the offer, both players immediately receive $100,000, while the remaining $800,000 is lost (e.g., to lawyers). Players discount payoffs one period in the future by δ. a. Solve for the game s subgame perfect equilibrium. Make sure to list what offer will be made in each period, in what period (if any) an offer will be accepted, and how the surplus is divided.

Solve by backwards induction. In period 3, player 1 will offer (.9,.1) (numbers represent the fraction of the total surplus), and player 2 will accept. Then, in period 2, player 2 offers (.9δ, 1.9δ), and 1 accepts. In period 1, player 1 offers ((1.9δ), δ(1.9δ)), and 2 accepts. b. Is player 2 s equilibrium payoff (measured in period 1) increasing, decreasing, or nonmonotonic in the discount factor δ. Why is this? 2 s payoff is δ(1.9δ), which is nonmonotonic in δ, increasing for δ < 5 9, decreasing for δ > 5 9. Were δ very low, 2 would get a low payoff, since she would not want to wait for more favorable outcomes in future periods, so 1 would offer her a low amount in period 1. On the other hand, a higher δ decreases player 2 s period 2 payoff, since 1 is more willing to wait for a favorable period 3 payoff. Thus, 2 s payoff is maximized for an intermediate discount factor. For parts c. and d., suppose that player 2 has the option to pay a bribe of $X at the beginning of period 1. Paying the bribe would increase the amount she would receive should the offer in period 3 be rejected to $200,000. No other aspect of the game is affected by the bribe. c. Suppose the discount factor is δ =.9. What is the maximum bribe she would be willing to pay? Paying the bribe increases 2 s share of the surplus from δ(1.9δ) to δ(1.8δ), or by.1δ 2. At δ =.9, the increase in her share of the surplus is thus $81,000, which is the maximum bribe she would pay. d. If the discount factor were smaller than.9, would the maximum bribe player 2 would be willing to play increase or decrease? Why? Paying the bribe increases her share of the surplus by.1δ 2, which is increasing in δ. Thus, were her discount factor smaller, her willingness to pay the bribe would decrease. This is because the bribe works by increasing her outside option, but since this outside option is only attainable several periods in the future, it is less relevant the smaller the discount factor. Problem 4 (20 points) Firm A is a monopoly seller of an intermediate good (e.g., glass for phone screens). For simplicity, suppose A s marginal cost of production is 0. A sells its output to firm B for price c. Suppose firm B uses exactly one unit of the intermediate good to produce one unit of its final good (e.g., phones), and (for simplicity) that B has no costs other than the cost of the intermediate good purchased from A. Demand for B s final good is given by Q = 1 P. Suppose firms A and B interact as follows. First, A chooses a price for the intermediate good, c. Then, B observes c and chooses a price for its final good. Both A and B wish to maximize their profits. a. Determine B s profit-maximizing price, as a function of c (hint: B takes c as fixed when choosing price). Firm B sets price P to solve: which has solution P = 1 2 + c 2. max(1 P )(P c) P b. Determine the quantity of the intermediate good B purchases, as a function of c (hint: recall that B needs exactly one unit of the intermediate good for each copy of the final good it sells). At the price solved for in a., demand is Q = 1 2 c 2. c. Determine the value of c that maximizes firm A s profit. What quantity of the final good is produced?

Given the answer to b., firm A chooses c to solve: max c( 1 c 2 c 2 ) which has solution c = 1 2. At this value of c, quantity 1 4 of the final good is sold. Now, suppose that firm A and B merge. The merged firm maximizes the sum of A s profit and B s profit. d. Solve for the profit maximizing values of c and P. What quantity of the final good is produced? The merged firm chooses c and P to solve: max c (1 P,c 2 c ) + (1 P )(P c) (1) 2 which has solution c = 0, P = 1 2. Another way of thinking about this is that any positive value of c is a transfer from B to A (and thus irrelevant to the merged firm), while B s profit is clearly decreasing in c. e. Combinations of producers of intermediate and final goods are often referred to as vertical mergers. Based on your answers to parts c. and d., do vertical mergers tend to increase or decrease prices of final goods? The merged firm produces a greater quantity of the final good at a lower price, because firm B no longer has to pay a markup above marginal cost for the intermediate good. This effect is known as the elimination of double marginalization, and is commonly cited as a reason why vertical mergers are likely to be legal. 1 Problem 5 (20 points) Consider a common good (e.g., clean air) that is depleted with use. N agents consume the good, and each gets utility both from its own consumption and from the remaining stock of the common good. There is no cost associated with consuming x i. If agent i consumes x i, agent i s utility is: u i (x i, x i ) = ln(x i ) + ln(6000 2 N x j ) a. Suppose N = 2. Show that the two agents best response functions are given by: 2 j=1 x 1 (x 2 ) = 1500 1 2 x 2, x 2 (x 1 ) = 1500 1 2 x 1 Solve for the Nash equilibrium values of x 1 and x 2. Agent 1 s maximization problem is: max ln(x 1 ) + ln(6000 2x 1 2x 2 ) x 1 1 2 First order condition: = x 1 6000 2x 1 2x 2 x 1 = 1500 1 2 x 2 Agent 2 s best response follows from symmetry. Plugging one best response into the other yields a Nash equilibrium of x 1 = x 2 = 1, 000. 1 See the Feburary 26, 2019 AT&T/Time Warner appellate decision at https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/390e66d6d58f426b852583ad00546ed6/$file/18-5214.pdf 2 Recall that the derivative of ln(x) is 1 x.

b. Now suppose that there are N agents. Solve for the symmetric Nash equilibrium, in which all agents choose the same value of x. Agent 1 s maximization problem is: max ln(x 1 ) + ln(6000 2 x 1 j x j ) 1 2 First order condition: = x 1 6000 2 j x j x 1 = 3000 N + 1 = x j (from symmetry)