Three voters vote over two candidates (A and B), and each voter has two pure strategies: vote for A and vote for B. When A wins, voter 1 gets a payoff of 1, and 2 and 3 get payoffs of 0; when B wins, 1 gets 0 and 2 and 3 get 1. Thus, 1 prefers A, and 2 and 3 prefer B. The candidate getting 2 or more votes is the winner (majority rule). Find a weakly dominant strategy. Compute for the pure strategy Nash equilibrium.

Three voters vote over two candidates (A and B), and each voter has two pure strategies: vote for A and vote for B. When A wins, voter 1 gets a payoff of 1, and 2 and 3 get payoffs of 0; when B wins, 1 gets 0 and 2 and 3 get 1. Thus, 1 prefers A, and 2 and 3 prefer B. The candidate getting 2 or more votes is the winner (majority rule). Find a weakly dominant strategy. Compute for the pure strategy Nash equilibrium.

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider the following voting game. There are three players, 1, 2 and 3. And there are three alternatives: A, B and C. Players vote simultaneously for an alternative. Abstaining is not allowed. Thus, the strategy space for each player is {A, B, C}. The alternative with the most votes wins. If no alternative receives a majority, then alternative A is selected. Denote ui(d) the utility obtained by player i if alternave d {A, B, C} is selected. The payoff functions are, u1 (A) = u2 (B) = u3 (C) = 2 u1 (B) = u2 (C) = u3 (A) = 1 u1 (C) = u2 (A) = u3 (B) = 0 a. Let us denote by (i, j, k) a profile of pure strategies where player 1’s strategy is (to vote for) i, player 2’s strategy is j and player 3’s strategy is k. Show that the pure strategy profiles (A,A,A) and (A,B,A) are both Nash equilibria. b. Is (A,A,B) a Nash equilibrium? Comment.
Mr. and Mrs. Smith vote opposite in presidential elections in a swing state. Assign 1 point for voting your preferred candidate and 0 points if you don’t vote. If you don’t want your candidate to lose, what is the Nash equilibrium in this situation?
A crime is witnessed by 3 citizens. Every citizen would like the police to be informed about the crime, but prefers that someone else reports it (filing a report is a hassle). Each of the three citizens chooses simultaneously (and independently) whether to call the police or not. When no one makes a call, every citizen receives payoff 0. If at least one citizen calls the police, citizens who call get payoff 5, and those who don't call get payoff 9. (a) Find all Nash equilibria in pure strategies. (b) Compute a symmetric Nash equilibrium in mixed strategies (i.e., an equilibrium in which every citizen calls with the same probability p E (0, 1)). (c) Does the game have a Nash equilibrium in pure or mixed strategies different from those you identified in (a) and (b)? If yes, construct one. If not, argue why not.
Consider a game with two players (Alice and Bob) and payoffffs Bob Bob s1 s2 Alice, s1 3, 3 0, 0 Alice, s2 0, 0 2, 2 In the equilibrium in the above game, Alice should (A) always choose the fifirst strategy s1; (B) choose the fifirst strategy s1 with probability 40% ; (C) choose the fifirst strategy s1 with probability 50% ; (D) choose the fifirst strategy s1 with probability 60% .
There are two candidates in an election that compete only on the education budget they will enact if elected. The budget can be any integer from $1 to $8 and the distribution of voters’ preferences over these outcomes is given below. For example, there are 2 voters that prefer a budget of $1, 4 voters that prefer a budget of $2, and so on. Furthermore, all voters have single-peaked preferences. Assume the candidates’ sole objective is to receive as many votes as possible. (Image Attached) a) Find a proposed budget for each candidate that constitutes an equilibrium. Explain.
Mr. and Mrs. Smith vote opposite in presidential elections in a swing state. Assign 1 point for voting your preferred candidate and 0 points if you don’t vote. If you don’t want your candidate to lose, what is the Nash equilibrium in this situation, please explain ?
Someone at a party pulls out a $100 bill and announces that he is going to auction it off. There are n=10 people at the partywho are potential bidders. The owner of the $100 bill puts forth the following procedure: All bidders simultaneously submit a written bid. Only the highest bidders pay their bid (assuming that the highest bid is positive). If m people submit the highest bid, then each receives 1/m of the $100. Each person’s strategy set is {0,1,2,...,1000}{0,1,2,...,1000} so bidding can go as high as $1,000. The payoff of a player bidding bi is:0 if bi < max{b1,b2,…,bn},and 100/m − bi if bi = max {b1,b2,…,bn}where,m is the number of bidders whose bid equals max{b1,...,bn}. How many pure-strategy Nash equilibria does this game have? 1) 0 2) 1 3) 4 4) More than 4.
0 E F 3 2 FIGURE 2 23 D G 2 H 0 1 (2) Two friends, Albert (A) and Berta (B), have to decide on going to one of three bars, Xenia's (X), Yara's (Y), or Zana's (Z). They decide to select a bar by alternatively vetoing bars until one remains. First Albert vetoes a bar. If at least two bars remain, then Berta vetoes another bar. That process continues until a single bar remains unvetoed. Suppose Albert prefers Xenia's to Yara's to Zana's and Berta prefers Zana's to Yara's to Xenia's. Assume that, for each of the two, going to their most preferred bar gives a utility of 2, going to their next preferred bar gives a utility of 1, and going to their least preferred bar gives a utility of 0. Model this as an extensive form game and find its Nash equilibria. Which of the Nash equilibria are subgame perfect?
There is a beach with nine regions in it and two pop sellers must choose in which region to situate. Customers in each region walk to the closest seller to buy a pop. Each pop is sold for $1 each. Suppose that the customers are not distributed evenly across the regions. Regions 2 through 9 each have 10 customers but region 1 has x customers. For what values of x does the strategy of locating in region 2 dominate locating in region 1? In particular, what is the maximum value of x for this to be true? Please show all your calculations in your written solution.
Two staff managers in the ΠBΦ sorority, the house manager (player 1) and kitchen manager (player 2), must select a resident assistant from a poolof three candidates: {a, b, c}. Player 1 prefers a to b, and b to c. Player 2 prefers b to a, and a toc. The process that is imposed on them is as follows: First, the house manager vetoes one of thecandidates and announces the veto to the central office for staff selection and to the kitchenmanager. Next the kitchen manager vetoes one of the remaining two candidates and announcesit to the central office. Finally the director of the central office assigns the remaining candidateto be a resident assistant at ΠBΦ.a. Model this as an extensive-form game (using a game tree). You will need to define theutilities of both players.b. Find the subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium (or equilibria) for this game. Is it unique?c. Now assume that before the two players play the game, player 2 can send an alienatinge-mail to one of the candidates, which would…
Consider the following two-player game with three options for each player. (Payouts are listed for the row player first, then the column player.) player Y layery 3,3 A 1,5 4,4 6,2 K 8,1 3,7 5,2 0,6 1,1 Find a mixed Nash equilibrium for this game. Solution suggestion: Use two variables per player. If p and are the probabilities of selecting the first two strategies, then 1-p-q is the probability of selecting the third strategy. You will need to solve a system of equations.
In Homework 1, we saw that there is no strict dominant strategy equilibrium in an inspection game. Thus, the players must randomize and play a mixed strategy in equilibrium. Suppose the agent shirks with probability p₁ and works with probability (1 - p₁), while the principal inspects with probability p2 and does not inspect with probability (1-P2). Find the mixed strategy equilibrium for this game. I NI S (0, -k) (w, -w) W (w c, p-w-k)| (wc, p-w) Table 1: Payoff matrix for the inspection game