Game Theory and Its Applications
Game Theory and Its Applications
B1 B2 B3 B4 Row min
A1 8 -2 9 -3 -3
Company A
A2 6 6 8 5
5
A3
-2 4 -9 5 -9
Column max 8 5 9 8
Minimax
Analysis
Optimal solution: select strategies A2 and B2
Value of the game: 5%
A and B use pure strategy SADDLE POINT solution
Saddle point solution guarantees that neither
company is tempted to select a better strategy
If you have a Dominating strategy, use
it
Strategy 2 25 - 10
Eliminate any Dominated strategy
Eliminate
strategy 2 as Opponent
its dominated
by strategy 1 Strategy 1 Strategy 2
You
Strategy 2 25 - 10
Comedy 38 14 70 14
Column max 45 58 70
Minimax
Two-Person Nonconstant-
Sum Games
Most game-theoretic models of business situations
are not constant-sum games because it is unusual for
business competitors to be in conflict
Prisoner's dilemma
Prisoner's dilemma
Two suspects arrested for a crime
Prisoners decide whether to confess or not to
confess
If both confess, both sentenced to 3 months of jail
If both do not confess, then both will be sentenced
to 1 month of jail
If one confesses and the other does not, then the
confessor gets freed (0 months of jail) and the
non-confessor sentenced to 9 months of jail
What should each prisoner do?
Prisoners Dilemma
Prisoner 2
Confess Don't
Confess
-3 , -3 0 , -9
Prisoner 1
Don't
-9 , 0 -1 , -1
Nash equilibrium
NC C
NC
P, P T, S
Player 1
C S, T R, R
C=cooperative action
NC=noncooperative action
R=reward for cooperating T=temptation for double- P=punishment for not S=payoff to person who is
if both players cooperates crossing opponent cooperating double-crossed
Analysis of prisoner's
dilemma game
(P, P) is an equilibrium point -- P>S
For (R, R) is not equilibrium point -- T>R
The game is reasonable only if R>P
The prisoner's dilemma game is of interest because it
explains why two adversaries often fail to cooperate
with each other
Example
Competing restaurant: Hot Dog King and Hot Dog Chef are
attempting to determine their advertising budget next year.
The two restaurant will have a combined sales of $240 million and
can spend either $6 million or $10 million on advertising.
If one restaurant spend more money than other, the restaurant that
spends money more will have sales of $190 million.
1 finger -1 +1 -1
Odd
2 finger +1 -1 -1
Column
+1 +1
maximum
Mixed strategy: Odd's Optimal
Strategy
Define x1 = probability that Odd puts out one finger
x2 = probability that Odd puts out two fingers
y1 = probability that Even puts out one finger
y2 = probability that Even puts out two fingers
And x1, x2, y1, y2 >= 0
x1+x2= 1
y1+y2=1
Odd's mixed strategy becomes (x1, 1-x1)
If Even puts out 1 finger, then Odd's expected value = (-1)x1 + (+1)(1-
x1) = 1-2x1
Similarly, if Even puts out 2 fingers, Odd's expected value = (+1)(x1)
+ (-1)(1-x1) = 2x1 - 1
Mixed strategy: Even's Optimal
Strategy
Any mixed strategy for the row player that guarantees that the row
player gets an expected reward at least equal to the value of the game
is an optimal strategy for the row player.
Similarly, any mixed strategy for the column player that guarantees
that the column player's expected loss is no more than the value of
the game is an optimal strategy for the column player
Mixed strategy
Rock-paper-scissors game
Each player simultaneously forms his or her hand into the
shape of either a rock, a piece of paper, or a pair of scissors
Rule: rock beats (breaks) scissors, scissors beats (cuts)
paper, and paper beats (covers) rock
No pure strategy Nash equilibrium
One mixed strategy Nash equilibrium each
player plays rock, paper and scissors each with 1/3
probability
Nash's theorem
Existence
Any finite game will have at least one Nash equilibrium
possibly involving mixed strategies
Finding a Nash equilibrium is not easy
Not efficient from an algorithmic point of view
Dynamic games
Sequential moves
One player moves
Second player observes and then moves
Examples
Industrial Organization a new entering firm in the market
versus an incumbent firm; a leader-follower game in
quantity competition
Sequential bargaining game - two players bargain over the
division of a pie of size 1 ; the players alternate in making
offers
Game tree example: Bargaining
Period 2:
B offers x2.
(x1,1-x1) A responds. (x3,1-x3)
1 Y 1 1 Y
x1 x3
N
B B (0,0)
N
A B x2 A A
N
Y
0 0 0
Period 1: Period 3:
A offers x1. (x2,1-x2) A offers x3.
B responds. B responds.
Economic applications of
game theory
The study of oligopolies (industries containing only
a few firms)
The study of cartels, e.g., OPEC
The study of externalities, e.g., using a common
resource such as a fishery
The study of military strategies
The study of international negotiations
Bargaining
Auction
Games of incomplete information
First Price Sealed Bid Auction
Buyers simultaneously submit their bids
Buyers valuations of the good unknown to each other
Highest Bidder wins and gets the good at the amount he bid
Nash Equilibrium: Each person would bid less than what the
good is worth to you
Second Price Sealed Bid Auction
Same rules
Exception Winner pays the second highest bid and gets
the good
Nash equilibrium: Each person exactly bids the goods
valuation
Second price auction
Suppose you value an item at 100
You should bid 100 for the item
If you bid 90
Someone bids more than 100: you lose anyway
Someone bids less than 90: you win anyway and pay second-
price
Someone bids 95: you lose; you could have won by paying 95