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

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

Lecture 6 Dynamic games with imperfect information

1 R. 2 l r 1 1 l2 r 2

The Ohio State University Department of Economics Second Midterm Examination Answers

An introduction on game theory for wireless networking [1]

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

Prisoner s dilemma with T = 1

Game Theory with Applications to Finance and Marketing, I

(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?

Problem 3 Solutions. l 3 r, 1

Francesco Nava Microeconomic Principles II EC202 Lent Term 2010

Solution to Tutorial 1

Solution to Tutorial /2013 Semester I MA4264 Game Theory

Econ 711 Homework 1 Solutions

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

Exercises Solutions: Game Theory

Answers to Problem Set 4

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

Games of Incomplete Information ( 資訊不全賽局 ) Games of Incomplete Information

Answer Key: Problem Set 4

Exercises Solutions: Oligopoly

Notes for Section: Week 4

Chapter 11: Dynamic Games and First and Second Movers

6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 3: Strategic Form Games - Solution Concepts

Math 167: Mathematical Game Theory Instructor: Alpár R. Mészáros

Elements of Economic Analysis II Lecture XI: Oligopoly: Cournot and Bertrand Competition

MIDTERM ANSWER KEY GAME THEORY, ECON 395

Noncooperative Oligopoly

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

Microeconomics of Banking: Lecture 5

Advanced Microeconomic Theory EC104

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

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

Economics 109 Practice Problems 1, Vincent Crawford, Spring 2002

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

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

14.12 Game Theory - Midterm I 10/13/2011

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

Strategic Production Game 1

m 11 m 12 Non-Zero Sum Games Matrix Form of Zero-Sum Games R&N Section 17.6

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

Agenda. Game Theory Matrix Form of a Game Dominant Strategy and Dominated Strategy Nash Equilibrium Game Trees Subgame Perfection

MA200.2 Game Theory II, LSE

Economics 171: Final Exam

Game Theory: Global Games. Christoph Schottmüller

that internalizes the constraint by solving to remove the y variable. 1. Using the substitution method, determine the utility function U( x)

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

Simon Fraser University Spring 2014

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

d. Find a competitive equilibrium for this economy. Is the allocation Pareto efficient? Are there any other competitive equilibrium allocations?

Introduction to Multi-Agent Programming

PAULI MURTO, ANDREY ZHUKOV

CUR 412: Game Theory and its Applications, Lecture 9

G5212: Game Theory. Mark Dean. Spring 2017

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

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

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

Econ 414 Midterm Exam

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

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

preferences of the individual players over these possible outcomes, typically measured by a utility or payoff function.

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

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

CS711: Introduction to Game Theory and Mechanism Design

Lecture 9: Basic Oligopoly Models

Microeconomics II. CIDE, MsC Economics. List of Problems

Their opponent will play intelligently and wishes to maximize their own payoff.

Yao s Minimax Principle

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

CHAPTER 15 Sequential rationality 1-1

Extensive-Form Games with Imperfect Information

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

14.01 Principles of Microeconomics, Fall 2007 Chia-Hui Chen November 26, Lecture 28. Oligopoly

Lecture 5 Leadership and Reputation

MATH 4321 Game Theory Solution to Homework Two

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

1 Solutions to Homework 3

UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Game Theory (EMBA 296 & EWMBA 211) Summer 2016

ECON 459 Game Theory. Lecture Notes Auctions. Luca Anderlini Spring 2017

Game Theory: Minimax, Maximin, and Iterated Removal Naima Hammoud

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

Economics 335 March 2, 1999 Notes 6: Game Theory

PAULI MURTO, ANDREY ZHUKOV. If any mistakes or typos are spotted, kindly communicate them to

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.

Introduction to Game Theory

Overuse of a Common Resource: A Two-player Example

Finitely repeated simultaneous move game.

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

MIDTERM 1 SOLUTIONS 10/16/2008

ECONS 424 STRATEGY AND GAME THEORY HANDOUT ON PERFECT BAYESIAN EQUILIBRIUM- III Semi-Separating equilibrium

Game Theory: Additional Exercises

In the Name of God. Sharif University of Technology. Microeconomics 2. Graduate School of Management and Economics. Dr. S.

Strategy -1- Strategy

Math 135: Answers to Practice Problems

Copyright 2008, Yan Chen

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.

Introduction to Game Theory

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

Regret Minimization and Security Strategies

Iterated Dominance and Nash Equilibrium

Transcription:

Name:... ECO 5341 (Section 2) Spring 2016 Midterm March 24th 2016 Total Points: 100 For full credit, please be formal, precise, concise and tidy. If your answer is illegible and not well organized, if your arguments are informal and imprecise, you will lose points. Show all your algebra! Question 1 (20 points): Consider the following two person game. Player 1 is row player, Player 2 is column player. L C R T 3,3 1,2 5,1 M 2,3 2,4 6,0 B 1,2 0,5 1,5 a) (5 points) Does player 1 have a strictly dominated strategy? Explain formally by writing player 1 s best response to every possible strategy of player 2. Once you eliminate player 1 s strictly dominated strategy, does player 2 now have a strictly dominated strategy? Again explain formally. Answer: Player 1 s best reponses are BR 1 (L) = T BR 1 (C) = M BR 1 (R) = M Note that for player 1, Strategy B is strictly dominated by Strategy M. After eliminating B, we have Player 2 s best reponses are L C R T 3,3 1,2 5,1 M 2,3 2,4 6,0 BR 2 (T) = L BR 2 (M) = C Note that for player 2, Strategy R is strictly dominated by both Strategy C and Strategy L. 1

b) (5 points) After eliminating the strictly dominated strategies for each player, state all pure strategy NE of this game. Note: Just stating the pure strategy NE is suffi cient. Answer: (T,L) and (M,C) are pure NE. 2

b) (10 points) Find all mixed strategy NE of this game. We have L C T 3,3 1,2 M 2,3 2,4 3q + (1 q) = 2q + 2(1 q) 2q + 1 = 2 q = 1 2 and 3p + 3(1 p) = 2p + 4(1 p) 3 = 4 2p p = 1 2 The Mixed Strategy NE is Player 1 plays T with probability 1 2 and plays M with probability 1 2. Player 2 plays L with probability 1 2 and plays C with probability 1 2 3

Question 2 (20 points) Two research firms, Firm 1 and Firm 2 simultaneously choose how much time x i to spend on research to develop a new drug. Firm 1 chooses x 1 0 and Firm 2 chooses x 2 0. If Firm i spends x i > x j, that is, spends strictly more time on research than its rival, then Firm i gets 10 x i. If Firm i spends x i < x j, that is, spends strictly less time than its rival, all time spent on research is lost and Firm i receives a payoff of x i. If the two firms spend the exact same amount x i = x j, then each firm gets 5 x i. The two firms payoff functions are given by u 1 (x 1, x 2 ) = u 2 (x 1, x 2 ) = 10 x 1 if x 1 > x 2 5 x 1 if x 1 = x 2 x 1 if x 1 < x 2 10 x 2 if x 2 > x 1 5 x 2 if x 1 = x 2 x 1 if x 1 < x 2 a) (5 points) Is the strategy pair (x 1 = 5, x 2 = 5) a NE? Your argument needs to be formal. Answer: The strategy pair (x 1 = 5, x 2 = 5) is NOT a NE. In this proposed NE, player 1 s payoff is u 1 (x 1 = 5, x 2 = 5) = 5 5 = 0 Instead of playing x 1 = 5, player 1 can set any x 1 = 5 + ε where ε < 5 and get u 1 (x 1 = 5 + ε, x 2 = 5) = 10 (5 + ε) = 5 ε > 0 which is strictly better than his current payoff of 0. Since player 1 has a profitable deviation, this is not a NE. 4

b) (5 points) Is there any NE in which x 1 < x 2 < 5, that is Firm 1 spends strictly less time on research than Firm 2 and also both firms spend strictly less than 5? To receive any credit your argument needs to be formal, that is, you need to formally show if there is or there is not any such NE. Answer: Suppose there is a strategy profile in which x 1 = a < x 2 = b < 5 and this strategy profile is a NE. In this proposed NE, player 1 s payoff is u 1 (x 1 = a, x 2 = b) = a < 0 since a < b. But player 1 can instead play x 1 = b and get u 1 (x 1 = b, x 2 = b) = 5 b > 0. which is strictly better than his current payoff of a < 0. Since player 1 has a profitable deviation, there cannot be a NE where x 1 < x 2 < 5. 5

c) (10 points) Is any strategy pair with x 1 = x 2 where 0 x 1 = x 2 < 5 a NE? (That is, both firms spend the same time on research and both firms spend strictly less than 5). Your argument needs to be formal to receive any credit. Answer: First, suppose there is a strategy profile in which 0 < x 1 = x 2 = a < 5 and this strategy profile is a NE. In this proposed NE, player 1 s payoff is u 1 (x 1 = a, x 2 = a) = 5 a < 5. But player 1 can instead play x 1 = 5 and get u 1 (x 1 = 5, x 2 = a) = 10 5 = 5 > 5 a. which is strictly better than his current payoff of 5 a. Since player 1 has a profitable deviation, there cannot be a NE where 0 < x 1 = x 2 = a < 5. The only remaining possibility is the profile x 1 = x 2 = 0. In this proposed profile, player 1 s payoff is u 1 (x 1 = 0, x 2 = 0) = 5. But note that player 1 can instead play x 1 = ε > 0 and get u 1 (x 1 = ε, x 2 = 0) = 10 ε > 5 as long as ε < 5. Since player 1 has a profitable deviation, the profile x 1 = x 2 = 0 is not a NE. Therefore, there is no NE in which 0 x 1 = x 2 < 5. 6

Question 3 (30 points) Consider two farmers, Farmer 1 and Farmer 2 who choose the number of palm trees x i to plant in a common green field. If Farmer 1 plants x 1 trees and Farmer 2 plants x 2 trees, then there will a total number of X = x 1 + x 2 trees. If a total number of X trees are planted, then each palm tree can fetch a price P given by P = 600 X where X = x 1 + x 2 is the total number of palm trees. Note that the more palm trees planted, the lower the price each tree can fetch. Each palm tree costs the farmer c = $60. Therefore the profit of each farmer is given by π 1 (x 1, x 2 ) = (600 x 1 x 2 )x 1 60x 1 π 2 (x 1, x 2 ) = (600 x 1 x 2 )x 2 60x 2 Each farmer i simultaneusly chooses his own number of trees x i to maximize own profits π i. That is, Farmer 1 chooses x 1 to maximize π 1 (x 1, x 2 ) and Farmer 2 chooses x 2 to maximize π 2 (x 1, x 2 ). 7

a) (15 points) Derive Farmer 1 s best response x1 (x 2) and Farmer 2 s best response x2 (x 1).Find the equilibrium number of trees (x1, x 2 ) planted by the farmers. How many palm trees in total are planted, that is, what is X = x1 + x 2? What is the equilibrium profit of each farmer in this equilibrium? You need to show all your algebra. Answer: Choose x 1 to Maximize π 1 (x 1, x 2 ) = (600 x 1 x 2 )x 1 60g 1 FOC is 600 2x 1 x 2 60 = 0 which gives us x 1(x 2 ) = 270 1 2 x 2 Similarly, choosing x 2 to Maximize π 2 (x 1, x 2 ) = (600 x 1 x 2 )x 2 60g 2 FOC is 600 2x 2 x 1 60 = 0 which gives us x 2(x 1 ) = 270 1 2 x 1 The NE pair (x 1, x 2 ) solves x1 = 270 1 2 x 2 x 1 = 270 1 [ 270 1 ] 2 2 x 1 3 4 x 1 = 270 2 x 1 = 180 Hence x 2 = 270 1 2 180 x 2 = 180 We have P = 600 360 = 240 π 1 = π 2 = (240 60) 180 = 180 180 = 32, 400 8

9

b) (10 points) What is the total number of palm trees X M that would maximize the joint profits of the two farmers. Notice that the joint profits of the two farmers are given by π (X) = (600 X)X 60X How does the optimal number of total goats X M that maximizes π (X) above compare with the total number X = x1 + x 2 you found in part a? Do the farmers overplant or underplant when they choose x 1 and x 2 individually to maximize own profits. Note: To find X M, you need to maximize π (X) = (600 X)X 60X with respect to X. yields Answer: Maximizing π (X) = (600 X)X 60X 600 2X M 60 = 0 X M = 270 Since x 1 + x 2 = 180 + 180 = 360 > X M = 270 farmers overuse the green when maximizing individually. 10

c) (5 points) Suppose the two farmers try to cooperate and each decide to plant exactly half of the joint profit maximizing number of trees X M you found in part (b). Is this cooperative outcome ) (x 1 = x 2 = XM 2 a Nash Equilibrium? Explain why or why not. Answer: No, strategy profile x 1 = x 2 = XM 2 = 270 2 = 135 is not NE. When Farmer 2 sets x 2 = 135, Farmer 1 s best response is x 1 = 270 1 2 x 2 = 270 1 2 135 = 202. 5 > 135. 11

Question 4 (15 points) Consider the following game between a homeowner and a contractor. In the first stage of the game, the contractor chooses his hourly wage w to maximize own payoff u c (w, L) = (w 20)L where L > 0 is the amount of service hours provided. L is chosen by the homeowner in the second stage of the game. After observing w chosen by the contractor, in the second stage the homeowner chooses the number of service hours L to maximize own payoff u h (w, H) = 100βL βl 2 wl where β > 0 is the skill level of the contractor. Find the backward induction equilibrium (w, L ) as a function of β. How does the contractor s equilibrium hourly wage w and homeowner s demand for contractor s service L depend on the contractor s skill level β? Answer: Choosing L to maximize yields the FOC u h (w, H) = 100βL βl 2 wl 100β 2βL w = 0 L (w) = 50 w 2β In the first stage the contractor chooses w to maximize u c (w, L) = (w 20)L (w) = 50w w2 2β + 10w β 1000 FOC is given by Hence 50 w β + 10 β = 0 w = 50β + 10 ( ) L (w 50β + 10 ) = 50 L (w ) = 25 5 2β β 12

Question 5 (10 points) Consider the following sequential move game. First, Player 1 chooses between L and R. If Player 1 chhoses L, the game ends. If Player 1 chooses R, in the second stage Player 2 chooses between In and Out. If Player 2 chooses Out, the game ends. If Player 2 plays In, it is again Player 1 s turn to move at the last stage and Player 1 chooses between T and B. The first payoff is Player 1 s payoff, the second payoff is Player 2 s payoff. Player 1 L R 4,2 Player 2 Out In 3,3 T Player 1 B 5,2 4,3 Describe the "backward induction equilibrium" of the game by stating the equilibrium strategy of each player at every decision node that the player has to choose an action. What is the backward induction equilibrium "outcome" of this game. Answer: The backward induction equilibrium is Player 1 plays L in the first stage If called to action Player 2 plays Out in the second stage If called to action Player 1 plays T in the last stage. The backward induction equilibrium outcome is Player 1 plays L in the first stage and the game ends with players getting a payoff (4,2). 13

Question 6 (5 points) Consider the game below and find the unique outcome that survives the Iterated Elimination of Strictly Dominated Strategies by filling in the blanks below. You just need to fill in the blanks in the statements below. Player 1 is the row player, Player 2 is the column player. L C R T 3,1 2,3 0,4 M 1,2 2,2 3,1 B 4,2 3,1 2,1 Step 1: Strategy T is strictly dominated by Strategy B for Player 1 hence can be eliminated. L C R M 1,2 2,2 3,1 B 4,2 3,1 2,1 Step 2: Having eliminated Strategy T in the first step, now Strategy R is strictly dominated by Strategy L for Player.2 and hence can be eliminated. Step 3: Having eliminated Strategy R L C M 1,2 2,2 B 4,2 3,1 in the second step, now Strategy M is strictly dominated by Strategy B for Player 1 and hence can be eliminated. L C B 4,2 3,1 Step 4: The only pair of strategies that survive the Iterated Elimination of Strictly dominated Strategies is Strategy B for Player 1 and Strategy L for Player 2. 14