Bayesian Nash Equilibrium



Similar documents
ECON 459 Game Theory. Lecture Notes Auctions. Luca Anderlini Spring 2015

Games of Incomplete Information

Cournot s model of oligopoly

Chapter 7. Sealed-bid Auctions

Games of Incomplete Information

Minimax Strategies. Minimax Strategies. Zero Sum Games. Why Zero Sum Games? An Example. An Example

6.207/14.15: Networks Lectures 19-21: Incomplete Information: Bayesian Nash Equilibria, Auctions and Introduction to Social Learning

UCLA. Department of Economics Ph. D. Preliminary Exam Micro-Economic Theory

Chapter 9. Auctions. 9.1 Types of Auctions

Simon Fraser University Spring Econ 302 D200 Final Exam Solution Instructor: Songzi Du Tuesday April 21, 2015, 12 3 PM

Next Tuesday: Amit Gandhi guest lecture on empirical work on auctions Next Wednesday: first problem set due

Managerial Economics

Optimal Auctions Continued

Computational Learning Theory Spring Semester, 2003/4. Lecture 1: March 2

Game Theory and Algorithms Lecture 10: Extensive Games: Critiques and Extensions

MobLab Game Catalog For Business Schools Fall, 2015

How To Play A Static Bayesian Game

6.254 : Game Theory with Engineering Applications Lecture 2: Strategic Form Games

Economic Insight from Internet Auctions. Patrick Bajari Ali Hortacsu

Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second Price Auction:

Decision Making under Uncertainty

AN INTRODUCTION TO GAME THEORY

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Game Theory Problem Set - Dynamic Games

8 Modeling network traffic using game theory

ECON Game Theory Exam 1 - Answer Key. 4) All exams must be turned in by 1:45 pm. No extensions will be granted.

Hybrid Auctions Revisited

Internet Advertising and the Generalized Second-Price Auction: Selling Billions of Dollars Worth of Keywords

An Introduction to Sponsored Search Advertising

University of Oslo Department of Economics

Overview: Auctions and Bidding. Examples of Auctions

Asymmetric Information

Do not open this exam until told to do so.

Oligopoly. Oligopoly is a market structure in which the number of sellers is small.

Oligopoly and Strategic Pricing

CPC/CPA Hybrid Bidding in a Second Price Auction

Behavior of Interest Rates

Stapled Finance. Paul Povel and Raj Singh. Bauer College of Business, Univ. of Houston Carlson School of Management, Univ.

Chapter 12: Economics of Information

A Theory of Auction and Competitive Bidding

How to Solve Strategic Games? Dominant Strategies

Economics of Insurance

Markus K. Brunnermeier

Sequential lmove Games. Using Backward Induction (Rollback) to Find Equilibrium

Microeconomics Topic 3: Understand how various factors shift supply or demand and understand the consequences for equilibrium price and quantity.

Equilibrium: Illustrations

Backward Induction and Subgame Perfection

FINAL EXAM, Econ 171, March, 2015, with answers

Options. + Concepts and Buzzwords. Readings. Put-Call Parity Volatility Effects

Introduction to Computational Advertising

Psychological Pricing in Mergers & Acquisitions using Game Theory

??? Signaling Games???

Price competition with homogenous products: The Bertrand duopoly model [Simultaneous move price setting duopoly]

The Easy Way To Flipping Domain Names

Chapter 6 Competitive Markets

Introduction to Auction Design

Sharing Online Advertising Revenue with Consumers

Economics 335, Spring 1999 Problem Set #7

Bayesian Tutorial (Sheet Updated 20 March)

Imperfect information Up to now, consider only firms and consumers who are perfectly informed about market conditions: 1. prices, range of products

Game Theory 1. Introduction

L10. Chapter 13 Oligopoly: Firms in Less Competitive Markets

Math Quizzes Winter 2009

ECONOMICS Advanced Microeconomic Theory TENTATIVE COURSE OUTLINE

Chapter 4 Lecture Notes

From the probabilities that the company uses to move drivers from state to state the next year, we get the following transition matrix:

Microeconomic Theory Jamison / Kohlberg / Avery Problem Set 4 Solutions Spring (a) LEFT CENTER RIGHT TOP 8, 5 0, 0 6, 3 BOTTOM 0, 0 7, 6 6, 3

The New Mexico Lottery

1 Representation of Games. Kerschbamer: Commitment and Information in Games

Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium

Information in Mechanism Design

The Plaintiff s Attorney in the Liability Insurance Claims Settlement Process: A Game Theoretic Approach

Competition and Regulation. Lecture 2: Background on imperfect competition

WORKED EXAMPLES 1 TOTAL PROBABILITY AND BAYES THEOREM

The Ascending Auction Paradox

Lab 11. Simulations. The Concept

Chapter 7 Monopoly, Oligopoly and Strategy

Marketing Concept. The Marketing Concept

Part 2: Screening and Signaling in Games with Incomplete Information.

Understanding Options: Calls and Puts

Oligopoly: Firms in Less Competitive Markets

COMMERCE MENTORSHIP PROGRAM COMM295: MANAGERIAL ECONOMICS FINAL EXAM REVIEW SOLUTION KEY

Capital Structure. Itay Goldstein. Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania

Economics 203: Intermediate Microeconomics I Lab Exercise #11. Buy Building Lease F1 = 500 F1 = 750 Firm 2 F2 = 500 F2 = 400

Problem Set 1 Foundations of Financial Markets Instructor: Erin Smith Summer 2011 Due date: Beginning of class, May 31

MTH6120 Further Topics in Mathematical Finance Lesson 2

Online Appendix Feedback Effects, Asymmetric Trading, and the Limits to Arbitrage

The Basics of Game Theory

LATE AND MULTIPLE BIDDING IN SECOND PRICE INTERNET AUCTIONS: THEORY AND EVIDENCE CONCERNING DIFFERENT RULES FOR ENDING AN AUCTION

Feb 7 Homework Solutions Math 151, Winter Chapter 4 Problems (pages )

Transcription:

. Bayesian Nash Equilibrium

. In the final two weeks: Goals Understand what a game of incomplete information (Bayesian game) is Understand how to model static Bayesian games Be able to apply Bayes Nash equilibrium to make predictions in static Bayesian games Understand how to model sequential Bayesian games Be able to apply perfect Bayesian equilibrium to make predictions in sequential Bayesian games Experience a sampling of the diverse applications to which these concepts can be applied We only have 2 weeks, so let s make the most of it!

. Private vs. Public Information In Sequential BoS, all information is public, meaning everyone can see all the same information: O 2 O B 1 B O 2 B 2, 1 0, 0 0, 0 1, 2... but in many strategic situations, one player might know something that other players do not know.

. Private vs. Public Information Example: In this extensive-form representation of regular BoS, Player 2 cannot observe the action chosen by Player 1. O O B 1 2 B O B 2, 1 0, 0 0, 0 1, 2 When one player knows something that others do not, we call this private or asymmetric information.

. Imperfect Information There are different forms of asymmetric information When one player does not observe another player s actions, we call this imperfect information We can treat all simultaneous move games as games with imperfect information Game of imperfect information are important, but in many strategic settings there is private information about other things as well.

. Recall: BoS variant Player 1 is unsure whether Player 2 wants to go out with her or avoid her, and thinks that these two possibilities are equally likely. Player 2 knows Player 1 s preferences. So Player 1 thinks that with probability 1/2 she is playing the game on the left and with probability 1/2 she is playing the game on the right. O B O 2, 1 0, 0 B 0, 0 1, 2 2 wishes to meet O B O 2, 0 0, 2 B 0, 1 1, 0 2 wishes to avoid This is an example of a game in which one player does not know the payoffs of the other.

. More examples: Private Information Bargaining over a surplus and you aren t sure of the size Buying a car of unsure quality Job market: candidate is of unsure quality Juries: unsure whether defendant is guilty : sellers, buyers unsure of other buyers valuations When some players do not know the payoffs of the others, a game is said to have incomplete information. It s also known as a Bayesian game.

. In-class game 1: First-price auction Let s see what it s like to play a game with incomplete information I have a copy of the Mona Lisa that I want to sell for cash Each of you has a private valuation for the painting, only known to you I will auction it off to the highest bidder Everyone submits a bid (sealed simultaneous) Highest bidder wins the painting, pays their bid If tie, I ll flip a coin Note: Thanks to everyone who participated in the Moblab trials. Results + $$$ promised in a future class.

. In-class game 2: Second-price auction I have one copy of the Mona Lisa that I want to sell for cash Each of you has a private valuation for the painting, only known to you I will auction it off to the highest bidder Everyone submits a bid (sealed simultaneous) Highest bidder wins the painting, pays the second-highest bid If tie, I ll flip a coin

. How do we model Bayesian games? One approach: Random events are considered an act of nature (that determine game structure) Treat nature as another (non-strategic) player Draw nature s decision nodes in extensive form Treat game as extensive form game with imperfect info: players may/may not observe nature s action

. Recall: BoS variant Player 1 is unsure whether Player 2 wants to go out with her or avoid her, and thinks that these two possibilities are equally likely. Player 2 knows Player 1 s preferences. So Player 1 thinks that with probability 1/2 she is playing the game on the left and with probability 1/2 she is playing the game on the right. O B O 2, 1 0, 0 B 0, 0 1, 2 2 wishes to meet O B O 2, 0 0, 2 B 0, 1 1, 0 2 wishes to avoid Let s put this into extensive form

. BoS variant in extensive form O Wishes to Meet O B 2 B O Nature 1 B O Wishes to Avoid O B 2 B O B 2, 1 0, 0 0, 0 1, 2 2, 0 0, 2 0, 1 1, 0

. How do we model Bayesian games? How do we make predictions? Think back to basics of extensive form: Convert to (Bayesian) normal form Note: Nature s choice determines what type of person Player 2 is 2 s strategy specifies action of both Note: we have to write down the expected payoffs if there is uncertainty Try for Player 1 in BoS variant

. How do we model Bayesian games? The Bayesian normal form of our variant of BoS with incomplete information: OO OB BO BB O 2 1 1 0 1 1 B 0 2 2 1 Figure: The expected payoffs of Player 1

. How do we model Bayesian games? How do we make predictions? Think back to basics of extensive form: Convert to (Bayesian) normal form Note: Nature s choice determines what type of person Player 2 is 2 s strategy specifies action of both Note: we have to write down the expected payoffs if there is uncertainty Try for Player 1 in BoS variant Now do the same for Player 2, but... Fill in payoff for each type, put in ordered pair in each cell

. How do we model Bayesian games? The Bayesian normal form of our variant of BoS with incomplete information: OO OB BO BB O 2, (1, 0) 1, (1, 2) 1, (0, 0) 0, (0, 2) 1 B 0, (0, 1) 2, (0, 0) 1 2, (2, 1) 1, (2, 0) Figure: The expected payoffs of Player 1 and the payoffs for each type of Player 2

. = straightforward extension of NE: Each type of player chooses a strategy that maximizes expected utility given the actions of all types of other players and that player s beliefs about others types In our BoS variant: Action of Player 1 is optimal (maximizes expected utility) given the actions of the two types of Player 2 (and Player 1s beliefs about Player 2s type) Action of each type of Player 2 is optimal, given the action of Player 1 Claim: (O, OB) is a

. Warm up I: BoS or PD? You and a friend are playing a 2 2 matrix game, but you re not sure if it s BoS or PD. Both are equally likely. A B A 2, 2 0, 3 B 3, 0 1, 1 PD A B A 2, 1 0, 0 B 0, 0 1, 2 BoS Clicker vote: (2nd to last digit of perm) even = Player 1; odd = Player 2

. Warm up II Can you put this game into Bayesian normal form? 1, 1 1, 0 2, 0 3, 2 X Y 2 X Y A A.5 N.5 1 L B B 2 1 R X Y X Y 0, 0 2, 1 0, 1 1, 0

. Second price auction with private values Suppose v i is distributed uniformly over [0, 1] Key insight: that bidding one s value is a weakly dominant strategy Suppose that the highest other bid, b, is above your valuation. Suppose that b is below your valuation. What about ties? So there is a Nash equilibrium in which everyone bids her valuation This auction format is successful (in theory) because it identifies the buyer with the highest valuation and awards the object to her. However, she does not pay her full valuation for it

. First price auction with private values How can the seller squeeze a bit more revenue out of the winning buyer? Perhaps she should make the winner pay her own bid? That is what happens in a first price auction As a bidder, you have two considerations: you want to win conditional on winning, you want to pay as little as possible

. First price auction with private values You never would want to bid more than your valuation, because then if you win, you actually lose money It turns out that there is an equilibrium in which everyone bids some fraction of their valuation, q The question is, what is the appropriate fraction? Suppose that for all i, b i = qv i. It must be the case that for the appropriate value of q, this strategy maximizes each player s utility, given that everyone else is using this strategy. So what is player i s utility?

. First price auction with private values U(b i v i ) = (v i b i ) Pr(win b) = (v i b i ) Pr(b i > qv j for all j i) = (v i b i ) Pr(b i > qv j ) n 1 = (v i b i ) Pr(v j < b i q )n 1 = (v i b i )(b i /q) n 1 1 q n 1 [vbn 1 i b n i ] Differentiating and setting equal to zero yields b = n 1 n v i, so q = n 1 n. Thus everyone bids less than her value, trading off the probability of winning with the possibility of making a profit if she wins. The more people there are, the closer she bids to her value.