EC3324 Topics in Game Theory: Assessment
EC3324 Topics in Game Theory: Assessment
Francesco Feri
[email protected]
Office hours: in H312 at
11:00 to 12:00 on Tuesday
8:00 to 9:00 on Wednesday
Assessment
2 on-line tests (1 hour each), which contributes 10% of the final
grade (6th and 11th week, 10% each test).
Test 1: on lectures 1, 2, 3
Test 2: on lectures 4, 5, 6, 7
2-hour unseen final exam, which contributes 80% of the final
grade (about all topics).
three unassessed take-home assignments (4th, 9th and 12th week)
Reading
Robert Gibbons, A Primer in Game Theory, Harvester
Wheatsheaf 1992.
Additional readings could be assigned from time to time. They are an
integral part of the class and you are expected to read them.
2
Structure of the course
Lecture 1, 2, 3
Normal Form Games and Nash Equilibrium, Economic
applications
Lecture 4, 5, 6, 7
Dynamic games of complete information, either with perfect of
imperfect information. Repeated games. Economic applications.
Lecture 8, 9 10
Static and dynamic games of incomplete information. Economic
applications.
3
Lecture 1
Player 2
Not confess Confess
Player 1 Not confess -1, -1 -9, 0
Confess 0, -9 -6, -6
Note:
1) rational players do not play strictly dominated strategies
(because a strictly dominated strategy is not optimal for
all possible beliefs)
2) si' is dominated by si if:
ui(si, s-i) ui (si' , s-i)
Example 1
Player 2
L R
T 2,3 5,0
Player 1 M 3,2 1,1
B 1,0 4,1
Player 2
L R
T 2,3 5,0
Player 1 M 3,2 1,1
Player 2
L R
T 2,3 5,0
Player 1 M 3,2 1,1
Player 2
L
T 2,3
Player 1 M 3,2
Player 2
L
Player 1 M 3,2
This process is called iterated elimination of
strictly dominated strategies
(or iterated dominance)
The strategies that survive iterated dominance is
called rationalizable strategies
It is based on the idea that rational players do not
play dominated strategies
Two problems:
This process requires that it is common
knowledge that player are rational
This process often produces no accurate
predictions (see the following example)
Example 2
Player 2
L C R
T 2,3 2,2 5,0 3
Player 1 Y 3,2 5,3 3,1
Z 4,3 1,1 2,2
B 1,2 0,1 4,4 1
2
Definition of Best Response
Player 2
Ball Theatre
Player 1 Ball 2,1 0,0
Theatre 0,0 1,2
There are two Nash equilibria: (Ball, Ball) and
(Theatre, Theatre)
Example 3: Matching Pennies
Player 2
Head Tail
Player 1 Head 1,-1 -1,1
Tail -1,1 1,-1
There is no Nash equilibrium (of the game with ordinal
preferences)
Example 4: Stag-Hunt
Player 2
Stag Hare
Player 1 Stag 2,2 0,1
Hare 1,0 1,1
There are two equilibria:
(Stag, Stag) and (Hare, Hare)