Bayesian-Nash Equilibrium

Similar documents
Game Theory. Monika Köppl-Turyna. Winter 2017/2018. Institute for Analytical Economics Vienna University of Economics and Business

Introduction to Game Theory

EC319 Economic Theory and Its Applications, Part II: Lecture 2

Advanced Economic Theory Lecture 9. Bilateral Asymmetric Information. Double Auction (Chatterjee and Samuelson, 1983).

MS&E 246: Lecture 12 Static games of incomplete information. Ramesh Johari

Lecture Note II-3 Static Games of Incomplete Information. Games of incomplete information. Cournot Competition under Asymmetric Information (cont )

EC3224 Autumn Lecture #04 Mixed-Strategy Equilibrium

Mechanism Design: Bayesian Incentive Compatibility

Lecture 6 Games with Incomplete Information. November 14, 2008

Solution to Tutorial 9

Long-Run versus Short-Run Player

Potential Games. Krzysztof R. Apt. CWI, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, University of Amsterdam. Potential Games p. 1/3

Outline for today. Stat155 Game Theory Lecture 17: Correlated equilibria and the price of anarchy. Correlated equilibrium. A driving example.

EC319 Economic Theory and Its Applications, Part II: Lecture 7

Extensive Form Games I

Bayesian Games and Mechanism Design Definition of Bayes Equilibrium

EC3224 Autumn Lecture #03 Applications of Nash Equilibrium

Known Unknowns: Power Shifts, Uncertainty, and War.

Global Games I. Mehdi Shadmehr Department of Economics University of Miami. August 25, 2011

Robust Predictions in Games with Incomplete Information

BELIEFS & EVOLUTIONARY GAME THEORY

Mechanism Design: Bargaining

On Reputation with Imperfect Monitoring

Algorithmic Game Theory and Applications. Lecture 4: 2-player zero-sum games, and the Minimax Theorem

Working Paper EQUILIBRIUM SELECTION IN COMMON-VALUE SECOND-PRICE AUCTIONS. Heng Liu

Belief-based Learning

Correlated Equilibrium in Games with Incomplete Information

Working Paper EQUILIBRIUM SELECTION IN COMMON-VALUE SECOND-PRICE AUCTIONS. Heng Liu

MS&E 246: Lecture 17 Network routing. Ramesh Johari

Mixed Nash Equilibria

Introduction to Game Theory

Correlated Equilibria: Rationality and Dynamics

Game Theory. Professor Peter Cramton Economics 300

Discussion of "Persuasion in Global Games with an Application to Stress Testing" by Nicolas Inostroza and Alessandro Pavan

Game Theory and Algorithms Lecture 2: Nash Equilibria and Examples

Advanced Microeconomics

NTU IO (I) : Auction Theory and Mechanism Design II Groves Mechanism and AGV Mechansim. u i (x, t i, θ i ) = V i (x, θ i ) + t i,

Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium

Mechanism Design. Christoph Schottmüller / 27

A (Brief) Introduction to Game Theory

Bayesian Games and Auctions

Analyzing Games with Ambiguous Player Types Using the MINthenMAX Decision Model

Deceptive Advertising with Rational Buyers

Iterated Strict Dominance in Pure Strategies

Interdependent Value Auctions with an Insider Bidder 1

Game Theory. Strategic Form Games with Incomplete Information. Levent Koçkesen. Koç University. Levent Koçkesen (Koç University) Bayesian Games 1 / 15

Game theory Lecture 19. Dynamic games. Game theory

First Prev Next Last Go Back Full Screen Close Quit. Game Theory. Giorgio Fagiolo

Bargaining, Contracts, and Theories of the Firm. Dr. Margaret Meyer Nuffield College

Theory of Auctions. Carlos Hurtado. Jun 23th, Department of Economics University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Mechanism Design: Dominant Strategies

Negotiation: Strategic Approach

General-sum games. I.e., pretend that the opponent is only trying to hurt you. If Column was trying to hurt Row, Column would play Left, so

Dynamic Games, II: Bargaining

Mixture Selection, Mechanism Design, and Signaling

Graduate Microeconomics II Lecture 5: Cheap Talk. Patrick Legros

Symmetric Separating Equilibria in English Auctions 1

Game Theory. Solutions to Problem Set 4

1. Introduction. 2. A Simple Model

Payoff Continuity in Incomplete Information Games

Reinterpreting Mixed Strategy Equilibria: A Unification of the Classical and Bayesian Views

SF2972 Game Theory Exam with Solutions March 15, 2013

Game Theory: Spring 2017

Opting Out in a War of Attrition. Abstract

MS&E 246: Lecture 4 Mixed strategies. Ramesh Johari January 18, 2007

Game Theory Lecture 10+11: Knowledge

Perfect Conditional -Equilibria of Multi-Stage Games with Infinite Sets of Signals and Actions (Preliminary and Incomplete)

Game Theory, Population Dynamics, Social Aggregation. Daniele Vilone (CSDC - Firenze) Namur

Outline for Static Games of Incomplete Information

Recursive Methods Recursive Methods Nr. 1

EC476 Contracts and Organizations, Part III: Lecture 2

Game Theory Fall 2003

SUPPLEMENT TO INFORMATION AGGREGATION IN DYNAMIC MARKETS WITH STRATEGIC TRADERS (Econometrica, Vol. 80, No. 6, November 2012, )

Are Obstinacy and Threat of Leaving the Bargaining Table Wise Tactics in Negotiations?

Other Equilibrium Notions

Game Theory Correlated equilibrium 1

Bargaining with One-Sided Asymmetric Information and Nonstationary Behavioral Types

A Unified Framework for Monetary Theory and Policy Analysis

Evolution & Learning in Games

Open Sequential Equilibria of Multi-Stage Games with Infinite Sets of Types and Actions

Online Appendix Durable Goods Monopoly with Stochastic Costs

Informed Principal in Private-Value Environments

Definitions and Proofs

Lecture Notes on Game Theory

A Polynomial-time Nash Equilibrium Algorithm for Repeated Games

On the Unique D1 Equilibrium in the Stackelberg Model with Asymmetric Information Janssen, M.C.W.; Maasland, E.

On Hotelling s Stability in Competition

Higher Order Beliefs in Dynamic Environments

Lecture Slides - Part 4

On the Informed Principal Model with Common Values

Satisfaction Equilibrium: Achieving Cooperation in Incomplete Information Games

Final Exam (Solution) Economics 501b Microeconomic Theory

CS364A: Algorithmic Game Theory Lecture #13: Potential Games; A Hierarchy of Equilibria

Sealed-bid first-price auctions with an unknown number of bidders

An Introduction to Noncooperative Games

Bayes Correlated Equilibrium and Comparing Information Structures

Game Theory. Greg Plaxton Theory in Programming Practice, Spring 2004 Department of Computer Science University of Texas at Austin

Mechanism Design. Terence Johnson. December 7, University of Notre Dame. Terence Johnson (ND) Mechanism Design December 7, / 44

Economics 3012 Strategic Behavior Andy McLennan October 20, 2006

Econ 618: Correlated Equilibrium

Transcription:

Bayesian-Nash Equilibrium A Bayesian game models uncertainty over types of opponents a player faces The game was defined in terms of players, their types, their available actions A player s beliefs about others players types, and payoffs (defined over actions and types) Last week focused on simple examples with finitely many types for each player Today: model situations where it is more natural to have a continuum of types Recall a Bayesian strategy is a function mapping types to actions, hence Find the Bayesian-Nash equilibria (Nash equilibria in Bayesian strategies) In particular, focus on two kinds of equilibria: cut-off and linear equilibria EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 1

(Yet Another) Noisy Battle-of-the-Sexes Player 1 does not know what payoffs player receives from playing C In fact, there is some noise on player s payoff, δ Likewise player 1 s payoff to S is perturbed by some ε, from the perspective of player Suppose δ, ε U[0, a] S C S 3+δ 4 + ε 0+δ 0+ε C 1 + δ 1 + ε 4 + δ 3+ε A Bayesian strategy for player maps all their types (of δ) to an action (S or C) A Bayesian strategy for player 1 maps all their types (of ε) to an action (S or C) EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM

A Cut-Off Strategy A simple cut-off strategy specifies a single value of a player s type, below which one action is chosen, and above which another action is chosen eg Consider the following cut-off strategy for player characterized by some δ [0, a]: s (δ) = { S if δ < δ, and C if δ δ Notice this is a pure strategy It specifies a pure action for all δ It is possible to specify much more complicated (including mixed) strategies However, from player 1 s perspective, this strategy looks like mixing EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 3

Player s Strategy Player s strategy is to play S if δ < δ and C if δ is big enough seems sensible f(δ) = 1 a δ 0 a 1 a Player s type: δ Play S Play C Recall δ U[0, a]: density is f(δ) = 1 a For some value of δ, the probability that player plays S is Pr[δ < δ] ie the area below δ Equal to δ/a Thus, Pr[ plays C] = 1 δ/a EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 4

Player 1 s Best Response Player 1 needs to compare the payoffs from S and C Expected utility from S u 1 (S; s (δ)) = Pr[ plays S] (4 + ε) + Pr[ plays C] (1 + ε) = Pr[δ < δ] (4 + ε) + Pr[δ δ] (1 + ε) = (4 + ε) δ a + (1 + ε)( 1 δ ) a = 4 δ a + ( 1 a) δ + ε A similar calculation for the expected utility received from playing C u 1 (C; s (δ)) = Pr[ plays S] 0 + Pr[ plays C] 3 = Pr[δ δ] 3 = 3 ( 1 δ a) So u 1 (S; s (δ)) = 4 δ a + ( 1 δ ) ( a + ε 3 1 δ a) = u1 (C; s (δ)) EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 5

Is a Cut-Off Strategy So player 1 prefers to play S rather than play C if and only if the payoff is larger: 4 δ a + ( 1 δ ) ( ) a + ε 3 1 δ a ε 6 δ a ε This is itself a cut-off strategy for player 1, with cut-off ε = 6 δ/a So s 1 (ε) = { S if ε ε, and C if ε < ε Now, given that player 1 plays this strategy, what should player do? Player will play C if and only if u (C; s 1 (ε)) u (S; s 1 (ε)) EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 6

Player s Best Response Calculate the probabilities with which player 1 plays S and C from s perspective: f(ε) = 1 a ε 0 a 1 a Player 1 s type: ε Play C Play S Player 1 plays S if ε ε, and note that: Pr[ε ε] = 1 ε/a So s payoff from playing S is 3(1 ε/a) From C it s (1 + δ)(1 ε/a) + (4 + δ) ε/a, Play C if δ 6 ε a δ EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 7

Solving for the Equilibrium So, two equations in two unknowns ( δ and ε) Solve to find these values: 6 ε a = δ and 6 δ a = ε δ = ε = a 6 + a Player 1 plays S if ε is bigger than this Player plays C if δ is bigger than this This is a Bayesian-Nash equilibrium in pure cut-off strategies Note that, from an outside observer s perspective, it appears that the players are mixing: Pr[1 plays S] = Pr[ε ε] = 4 + a 6 + a and Pr[ plays S] = Pr[δ < δ] = 6 + a EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 8

A Comparison with the Complete-Information Game Recall the complete-information battle-of-the-sexes game with a = 0 ε = δ = 0: S C S 3 4 0 0 C 1 1 4 3 Mixed Nash at 4q + (1 q) = 3(1 q) q = 1 3 ; and p + 4(1 p) = 3p p = 3 In the Bayesian-Nash equilibrium the probability S is played when a 0 is lim Pr[1 plays S] = lim a 0 a 0 ( ) 4 + a 6 + a ( ) = 3, lim Pr[ plays S] = lim a 0 a 0 6 + a = 1 3 EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 9

A Trading Game A buyer s value for a good is v b U[0, 1] A seller s value is v s U[0, 1] They each observe their own value, but not the other player s They each simultaneously announce a price (p b and p s ) If p b p s a sale takes place at a price half way between: (p b + p s )/ Otherwise, no sale Players The players are the buyer and seller N = {b, s} Strategies A function p i : [0, 1] R assigning a price p i (v i ) to each of i s types Payoffs Both the players receive 0 if no sale is made (p b < p s ), otherwise u b (p b ; p s ) = v b p b + p s and u s (p b ; p s ) = p b + p s v s EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 10

Linear Strategies Suppose seller plays a linear strategy, so p s (v s ) = α + βv s What will buyer do? U b (p b ; p s (v s )) = Pr[p b p s ] { v b p b + E [p s p b p s ] } α p s α + β p b 1/β (α + p b )/ Note that p s = α + βv s U[α, α + β] The probability that p b p s is shaded: Pr[p b p s ] = (p b α)/β Expectation of p s given p b p s shown: E [p s p b p s ] = (α + p b )/ EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 11

The Buyer s Optimization Problem Substituting for this probability and expectation in the expression for U b gives U b (p b ; p s (v s )) = p b α β [ v b 1 { p b + α + p }] b Differentiating this (quadratic) function with respect to p b, and setting to zero: 1 β [ v b 1 { p b + α + p }] b = 3 4 { } pb α β p b (v b ) = 1 3 α + 3 v b Note this optimal strategy for the buyer is linear If the seller uses a linear strategy, so should the buyer Now consider the seller s optimization problem EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 1

The Seller s Problem Suppose buyer plays a linear strategy, so p b (v b ) = γ + δv b What will seller do? U s (p s ; p b (v b )) = Pr[p s p b ] { ps + E [p b p s p b ] v s } γ γ + δ p s 1/δ (p s + γ + δ)/ p b Note that p b = γ + δv b U[γ, γ + δ] The probability that p s p b is shaded: Pr[p s p b ] = (γ + δ p s )/δ Expectation of p b given p s p b shown: E [p s p s p b ] = (p s + γ + δ)/ EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 13

The Seller s Optimal Strategy Substituting for this probability and expectation in the expression for U s gives U s (p s ; p b (v b )) = γ + δ p s δ [ 1 { p s + p } ] s + γ + δ v s Differentiating this (quadratic) function with respect to p s, and setting to zero: 1 δ [ 1 { p s + γ + δ + p } ] s v s = 3 4 { } γ + δ ps δ p s (v s ) = 1 3 (γ + δ) + 3 v s So, again, the seller s best response to a linear strategy is also a linear strategy p s (v s ) = α + βv s = 1 3 (γ + δ) + 3 v s and p b (v b ) = γ + δv b = 1 3 α + 3 v b EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 14

Solving for the Equilibrium For these two strategies to be a Bayesian-Nash equilibrium, require the following: α = 1 3 (γ + δ), and β = 3, and γ = 1 3 α, and δ = 3 These solve to give α = 1 4 and γ = 1 1 So the linear Bayesian-Nash equilibrium is p b (v b ) = 1 1 + 3 v b and p s (v s ) = 1 4 + 3 v s Trade occurs whenever p s p b or, from the equilibrium strategies, whenever 1 4 + v s v b However, there is mutually beneficial trade opportunity whenever v s v b Therefore the linear equilibrium is inefficient EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 15

Illustrating the Inefficiency Some mutually beneficial trades do not take place In particular, whenever v s v b < 1 4 + v s, there is an inefficient lack of trade Plot this problem 00 0 04 06 08 10 Seller s value: v s 00 0 04 06 08 10 Buyer s value: vb A B v s = v b 1 4 + v s = v b In area A there is efficient trade In area B there is efficient lack of trade (seller s value higher than buyer s) Shaded area, inefficient lack of trade There are many other equilibria But this is the most efficient! EC3043 LECTURE 13: BAYESIAN-NASH EQUILIBRIUM 16