INCOMPLETE INFORMATION GAMES WITH MULTIPLE PRIORS*

We present a model of incomplete information games, where each player is endowed with a set of priors. Upon arrival of private information, it is assumed that each player “updates” his set of priors to a set of posterior beliefs, and then evaluates his actions by the most pessimistic posterior beliefs. So each player's preferences may exhibit aversion to ambiguity or uncertainty. We define a couple of equilibrium concepts, establish existence results for them, and demonstrate by examples how players’ views on uncertainty about the environment affect the strategic outcomes.     

Fault Tolerant Implementation

In this paper we investigate the implementation problem arising when some of the players are "faulty" in the sense that they fail to act optimally. The planner and the non-faulty players only know that there can be at most  k  faulty players in the population. However, they know neither the identity of the faulty players, their exact number nor how faulty players behave. We define a solution concept which requires a player to optimally respond to the non-faulty players regardless of the identity and actions of the faulty players. We introduce a notion of fault tolerant implementation, which unlike standard notions of full implementation, also requires robustness to deviations from the equilibrium. The main result of this paper establishes that under symmetric information any choice rule that satisfies two properties—  k  -monotonicity and no veto power—can be implemented by a strategic game form if there are at least three players and the number of faulty players is less than     . As an application of our result we present examples of simple mechanisms that implement the constrained Walrasian function and a choice rule for the efficient allocation of an indivisible good.     

Strategic information transmission networks

We study a model of multi-player communication. Privately informed decision makers have different preferences about the actions they take, and communicate to influence each others? actions in their favor. We prove that the equilibrium capability of any player to send a truthful message to a set of players depends not only on the preference composition of those players, but also on the number of players truthfully communicating with each one of them. We establish that the equilibrium welfare depends not only on the number of truthful messages sent in equilibrium, but also on how evenly truthful messages are distributed across decision makers.     

A folk theorem for repeated games played on a network

I consider repeated games on a network where players interact and communicate with their neighbors. At each stage, players choose actions and exchange private messages with their neighbors. The payoff of a player depends only on his own action and on the actions of his neighbors. At the end of each stage, a player is only informed of his payoff and of the messages he received from his neighbors. Payoffs are assumed to be sensitive to unilateral deviations. The main result is to establish a necessary and sufficient condition on the network for a Nash folk theorem to hold, for any such payoff function.     

Heterogeneous network games: Conflicting preferences

In many economic situations, a player pursues coordination or anti-coordination with her neighbors on a network, but she also has intrinsic preferences among the available options. We here introduce a model which allows to analyze this issue by means of a simple framework in which players endowed with an idiosyncratic identity interact on a social network through strategic complements or substitutes. We classify the possible types of Nash equilibria under complete information, finding two thresholds for switching action that relate to the two-player setup of the games. This structure of equilibria is considerably reduced when turning to incomplete information, in a setup in which players only know the distribution of the number of neighbors of the network. For high degrees of heterogeneity in the population the equilibria is such that every player can choose her preferred action, whereas if one of the identities is in the minority frustration ensues.     

Aggregate comparative statics

In aggregative games, each playerʼs payoff depends on her own actions and an aggregate of the actions of all the players. Many common games in industrial organization, political economy, public economics, and macroeconomics can be cast as aggregative games. This paper provides a general and tractable framework for comparative static results in aggregative games. We focus on two classes of games: (1) aggregative games with strategic substitutes and (2) nice aggregative games, where payoff functions are continuous and concave in own strategies. We provide simple sufficient conditions under which positive shocks to individual players increase their own actions and have monotone effects on the aggregate. The results are illustrated with applications to public good provision, contests, Cournot competition and technology choices in oligopoly.     

An experiment on learning with limited information: nonconvergence, experimentation cascades, and the advantage of being slow

We present the results of an experiment on learning in a continuous-time low-information setting. For a dominance solvable version of a Cournot oligopoly with differentiated products, we find little evidence of convergence to the Nash equilibrium. In an asynchronous setting, characterized by players updating their strategies at different frequencies, play tends toward the Stackelberg outcome which favors the slower player. Convergence is significantly more robust for a “serial cost sharing” game, which satisfies a stronger solution concept of overwhelmed solvability. As the number of players grows, this improved convergence tends to diminish, seemingly driven by frequent and highly structured experimentation by players leading to a cascading effect in which experimentation by one player induces experimentation by others. These results have implications both for traditional oligopoly competition and for a wide variety of strategic situations arising on the Internet.     

Games played in a contracting environment

We analyze normal form games where a player has to pay a price to a supplier in order to play a specific action. Our focus is on supplier competition, arising from the fact that distinct suppliers supply different players, and possibly different actions of the same player. With private contracts, where a player only observes the prices quoted by his own suppliers, the set of equilibrium distributions over player actions coincides with the set of equilibrium distributions when all actions are supplied competitively, at cost. With public contracts, the two distributions differ dramatically even in simple games.     

Games played in a contracting environment

We analyze normal form games where a player has to pay a price to a supplier in order to play a specific action. Our focus is on supplier competition, arising from the fact that distinct suppliers supply different players, and possibly different actions of the same player. With private contracts, where a player only observes the prices quoted by his own suppliers, the set of equilibrium distributions over player actions coincides with the set of equilibrium distributions when all actions are supplied competitively, at cost. With public contracts, the two distributions differ dramatically even in simple games.     

Drugs,guns, and targeted competition

We consider a dynamic competition game involving three players, in which each player can vary the extent of his competition on a per-rival basis. We call such competition targeted. We show that if the players are myopic, then the weaker players eventually lose the game to their strongest rival. If instead the players are sufficiently far-sighted, then all three players converge in their power and stay in the game. We develop our model in application to drug wars, but the approach of targeted competition can be applied to competition between firms or political parties, or to warfare.     

Sophisticated Experience-Weighted Attraction Learning and Strategic Teaching in Repeated Games

Most learning models assume players are adaptive (i.e., they respond only to their own previous experience and ignore others' payoff information) and behavior is not sensitive to the way in which players are matched. Empirical evidence suggests otherwise. In this paper, we extend our adaptive experience-weighted attraction (EWA) learning model to capture sophisticated learning and strategic teaching in repeated games. The generalized model assumes there is a mixture of adaptive learners and sophisticated players. An adaptive learner adjusts his behavior the EWA way. A sophisticated player rationally best-responds to her forecasts of all other behaviors. A sophisticated player can be either myopic or farsighted. A farsighted player develops multiple-period rather than single-period forecasts of others' behaviors and chooses to “teach” the other players by choosing a strategy scenario that gives her the highest discounted net present value. We estimate the model using data from p-beauty contests and repeated trust games with incomplete information. The generalized model is better than the adaptive EWA model in describing and predicting behavior. Including teaching also allows an empirical learning-based approach to reputation formation which predicts better than a quantal-response extension of the standard type-based approach. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C72, C91.     

Communication in repeated network games with imperfect monitoring

I consider repeated games with private monitoring played on a network. Each player has a set of neighbors with whom he interacts: a player's payoff depends on his own and his neighbors' actions only. Monitoring is private and imperfect: each player observes his stage payoff but not the actions of his neighbors. Players can communicate costlessly at each stage: communication can be public, private or a mixture of both. Payoffs are assumed to be sensitive to unilateral deviations. First, for any network, a folk theorem holds if some Joint Pairwise Identifiability condition regarding payoff functions is satisfied. Second, a necessary and sufficient condition on the network topology for a folk theorem to hold for all payoff functions is that no two players have the same set of neighbors not counting each other.     

Decompositions and potentials for normal form games

A basic model of commitment is to convert a two-player game in strategic form to a “leadership game” with the same payoffs, where one player, the leader, commits to a strategy, to which the second player always chooses a best reply. This paper studies such leadership games for games with convex strategy sets. We apply them to mixed extensions of finite games, which we analyze completely, including nongeneric games. The main result is that leadership is advantageous in the sense that, as a set, the leader's payoffs in equilibrium are at least as high as his Nash and correlated equilibrium payoffs in the simultaneous game. We also consider leadership games with three or more players, where most conclusions no longer hold.     

Measuring agents’ reaction to private and public information in games with strategic complementarities

In games with strategic complementarities, public information about the state of the world has a larger impact on equilibrium actions than private information of the same precision, because public signals are more informative about the likely behavior of others. We present an experiment in which agents’ optimal actions are a weighted average of the fundamental state and their expectations of other agents’ actions. We measure the responses to public and private signals. We find that, on average, subjects put a larger weight on the public signal. In line with theoretical predictions, as the relative weight of the coordination component in a player’s utility increases, players put more weight on the public signal when making their choices. However, the weight is smaller than in equilibrium, which indicates that subjects underestimate the information contained in public signals about other players’ beliefs.     

Gambling in contests

This paper presents a strategic model of risk-taking behavior in contests. Formally, we analyze an n-player winner-take-all contest in which each player decides when to stop a privately observed Brownian motion with drift. A player whose process reaches zero has to stop. The player with the highest stopping point wins. Unlike the explicit cost for a higher stopping time in a war of attrition, here, higher stopping times are riskier, because players can go bankrupt. We derive a closed-form solution of a Nash equilibrium outcome. In equilibrium, highest expected losses occur at an intermediate negative value of the drift.     

Infinite Histories and Steady Orbits in Repeated Games

We study a model of repeated games with the following features: (a) Infinite histories. The game has been played since days of yore, or is so perceived by the players: (b) Turing machines with memory. Since regular Turing machines coincide with bounded recall strategies (in the presence of infinite histories), we endow them with "external" memory; (c) Nonstrategic players. The players ignore complicated strategic considerations and speculations about them. Instead, each player uses his/her machine to update some statistics regarding the others′ behaviour, and chooses a best response to observed behaviour. Relying on these assumptions, we define a solution concept for the one shot game, called steady orbit. The (closure of the) set of steady orbit payoffs strictly includes the convex hull of the Nash equilibria payoffs and is strictly included in the correlated equilibria payoffs. Assumptions (a)–(c) above are independent to a large extent. In particular, one may define steady orbits without explicitly dealing with histories or machines.     

Inefficient Markov perfect equilibria in multilateral bargaining

We study a complete-information alternating-offer bargaining game in which one “active” player bargains with each of a number of other “passive” players one at a time. In contrast to most existing models, the order of reaching agreements is endogenously determined, hence the active player can “play off” some passive players against others by m oving back and forth bargaining with the passive players. We show that this model has a finite number of Markov Perfect Equilibria, some of which exhibiting wasteful delays. Moreover, the maximum number of delay periods that can be supported in Markov Perfect Equilibria increases in the order of the square of the number of players. We also show that these results are robust to a relaxing of the Markov requirements and to more general surplus functions. Received: November 19, 2001; revised version: August 20, 2002 RID="*" ID="*"This paper grew out of my dissertation submitted to Stanford University. I am deeply indebted to my advisor, Paul Milgrom, for his insights and guidance. I would also like to thank Douglas Bernheim, Sushil Bikhchandani, Harold Demsetz, Bryan Ellickson, Avner Greif, Peter Hammond, David Levine, Bentley Macleod, Joe Ostroy, John Pencavel, Jean-Laurent Rosenthal, David Starrett, Robert Wilson, Bill Zame and especially John Riley and Jeff Zwiebel for their helpful comments. I am grateful to an anonymous referee for extremely constructive suggestions.     

Indirect higher order beliefs and cooperation

This study experimentally examines the role of indirect higher order beliefs in sequential psychological games. We consider a three-player sequential game in which the first and third players do not interact sequentially, but only through an intermediary, the second player. We posit that the third player’s decision to cooperate depends on his indirect higher order belief, namely, his belief about what the first player believes the second player would choose. We employ pre-play communication between the first and third players as a way to influence the third player’s indirect higher order belief. The evidence demonstrates that communication can effectively induce cooperation from the third player by shaping his indirect higher order belief.     

Sequential two-prize contests

We study a two-stage all-pay auction with two identical prizes. In each stage, the players compete for one prize. Each player may win either one or two prizes. We analyze the unique subgame-perfect equilibrium of our model with two players where each player??s marginal values for the prizes are decreasing, constant, or increasing. We also analyze an equilibrium of the model with more than two players where each player??s marginal values for the prizes are nonincreasing.