Games of fixed rank: a hierarchy of bimatrix games

We propose and investigate a hierarchy of bimatrix games (A, B), whose (entry-wise) sum of the pay-off matrices of the two players is of rank k, where k is a constant. We will say the rank of such a game is k. For every fixed k, the class of rank k-games strictly generalizes the class of zero-sum games, but is a very special case of general bimatrix games. We study both the expressive power and the algorithmic behavior of these games. Specifically, we show that even for k = 1 the set of Nash equilibria of these games can consist of an arbitrarily large number of connected components. While the question of exact polynomial time algorithms to find a Nash equilibrium remains open for games of fixed rank, we present polynomial time algorithms for finding an ε-approximation.     

A general structure theorem for the Nash equilibrium correspondence

I consider n-person normal form games where the strategy set of each player is a non-empty compact convex subset of an Euclidean space, and the payoff function of player i is continuous in joint strategies and continuously differentiable and concave in the player i's strategy. No further restrictions (such as multilinearity of the payoff functions or the requirement that the strategy sets be polyhedral) are imposed. I demonstrate that the graph of the Nash equilibrium correspondence on this domain is homeomorphic to the space of games. This result generalizes a well-known structure theorem in [Kohlberg, E., Mertens, J.-F., 1986. On the strategic stability of equilibria. Econometrica 54, 1003–1037]. It is supplemented by an extension analogous to the unknottedness theorems in [Demichelis S., Germano, F., 2000. Some consequences of the unknottedness of the Walras correspondence. J. Math. Econ. 34, 537–545; Demichelis S., Germano, F., 2002. On (un)knots and dynamics in games. Games Econ. Behav. 41, 46–60]: the graph of the Nash equilibrium correspondence is ambient isotopic to a trivial copy of the space of games.     

Finding all Nash equilibria of a finite game using polynomial algebra

The set of Nash equilibria of a finite game is the set of nonnegative solutions to a system of polynomial equations. In this survey article, we describe how to construct certain special games and explain how to find all the complex roots of the corresponding polynomial systems, including all the Nash equilibria. We then explain how to find all the complex roots of the polynomial systems for arbitrary generic games, by polyhedral homotopy continuation starting from the solutions to the specially constructed games. We describe the use of Gröbner bases to solve these polynomial systems and to learn geometric information about how the solution set varies with the payoff functions. Finally, we review the use of the Gambit software package to find all Nash equilibria of a finite game.     

Iterated strict dominance in general games

We offer a definition of iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies (IESDS^*) for games with (in)finite players, (non)compact strategy sets, and (dis)continuous payoff functions. IESDS^* is always a well-defined order independent procedure that can be used to solve Nash equilibrium in dominance-solvable games. We characterize IESDS^* by means of a “stability” criterion, and offer a sufficient and necessary epistemic condition for IESDS^*. We show by an example that IESDS^* may generate spurious Nash equilibria in the class of Reny's better-reply secure games. We provide sufficient/necessary conditions under which IESDS^* preserves the set of Nash equilibria.     

Repeated games with present-biased preferences

We study infinitely repeated games with perfect monitoring, where players have β-δ preferences. We compute the continuation payoff set using recursive techniques and then characterize equilibrium payoffs. We then explore the cost of the present-time bias, producing comparative statics. Unless the minimax outcome is a Nash equilibrium of the stage game, the equilibrium payoff set is not monotonic in β or δ. Finally, we show how the equilibrium payoff set is contained in that of a repeated game with smaller discount factor.     

On p-rationalizability and approximate common certainty of rationality

This paper shows that common p-belief of rationality implies p-rationalizability for games with compact strategy sets. We also establish the Bayesian foundation for the perfect p-rationalizability for finite games. The p-rationalizability is then used to analyze the robustness of rationalizable sets. For any game with compact strategy sets, we show that the rationalizable set is robust, i.e., the strategies characterized by common p-belief of rationality are close to the rationalizable set when p→1.     

Co-ordination, Spillovers, and Cheap Talk

We analyze the role of cheap-talk in two player games with one-sided incomplete information. We identify conditions under which (1) players can fully communicate and coordinate on efficient Nash equilibria of the underlying complete information game; and (2) players cannot communicate so cheap-talk does not alter the equilibrium set of the Bayesian game. We present examples that illustrate several issues that arise when there is two-sided incomplete information. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C72, D82.     

Nash Equilibria in Pure Strategies

We consider an n ‐person non‐zero‐sum non‐cooperative game in normal form, where the strategy sets are some closed intervals of the real line. It is shown that if the pay‐off functions are continuous on the whole space and if for each pay‐off function the smallest local maximum in the strategy variable is a global maximum, then the game possesses a pure strategy Nash equilibrium.     

Bargaining and Boldness

We study a multiperson bargaining problem with general risk preferences through the use of Shaked's game of cycling offers with exogenous breakdown. If preferences are “smooth,” then as the risk of breakdown vanishes, the limiting outcome is one in which bargainers are equally marginally bold; where a bargainer's marginal boldness measures his willingness to risk disagreement in return for a marginal improvement in his position. Under smoothness, any (ordinal-)Nash solution is an equally marginally bold outcome. However, unlike the concept of the (ordinal-)Nash solution, a unique equally marginally bold outcome exists in natural cases—in particular, if all bargainers have risk-averse preferences of the rank-dependent expected utility type. For these preferences, the equally marginally bold outcome maximizes a “bargaining power”-adjusted (asymmetric) Nash product where the degree of asymmetry is determined by the disparity in the marginal valuation of certainty among bargainers. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C72, C78, D81.     

Essential equilibria in normal-form games

A Nash equilibrium x of a normal-form game G is essential if any perturbation of G has an equilibrium close to x. Using payoff perturbations, we show that for games that are generic in the set of compact, quasiconcave, and generalized payoff secure games with upper semicontinuous sum of payoffs, all equilibria are essential. Some variants of this result are also established.     

An admissible set occurring in various bargaining situations

Given a set of alternatives S and a binary relation M on S the admissible set of the pair (S, M) is defined to be the set of maximal elements with respect to the transitive closure of M. It is shown that existing solutions in game theory and mathematical economics are special cases of this concept (they are admissible sets of a natural S and M). These include the core of an n-person cooperative game, Nash equilibria of a noncooperative game, and the max-min solution of a two-person zero sum game. The competitive equilibrium prices of a finite exchange economy are always contained in its admissible set. Special general properties of the admissible set are discussed. These include existence, stability, and a stochastic dynamic process which leads to outcomes in the admissible set with high probability.     

Learning by trial and error

A person learns by trial and error if he occasionally tries out new strategies, rejecting choices that are erroneous in the sense that they do not lead to higher payoffs. In a game, however, strategies can become erroneous due to a change of behavior by someone else. We introduce a learning rule in which behavior is conditional on whether a player experiences an error of the first or second type. This rule, called interactive trial and error learning, implements Nash equilibrium behavior in any game with generic payoffs and at least one pure Nash equilibrium.     

On games with identical equilibrium payoffs

Summary. This paper compares the sets of Nash, coalition- proof Nash and strong Nash equilibrium payoffs of normal form games which are closely related. We propose sufficient conditions for equivalent or closely related games to have identical sets of equilibrium payoffs. Received: April 23, 1999; revised version: November 23, 1999     

On the Irrelevance of Risk Attitudes in Repeated Two-Outcome Games

We study equilibrium and maximin play in supergames consisting of the sequential play of a finite collection of stage games, where each stage game has two outcomes for each player. We show that for two-player supergames in which each stage game is strictly competitive, in any Nash equilibrium of the supergame, play at each stage is a Nash equilibrium of the stage game provided preferences over certain supergame outcomes satisfy a natural monotonicity condition. In particular, equilibrium play does not depend on risk attitudes. We establish an invariance result for games with more than two players when the solution concept is subgame perfection. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: C72, C9.     

The Nash bargaining solution in general n-person cooperative games

We present a noncooperative foundation for the Nash bargaining solution for an n-person cooperative game in strategic form. The Nash bargaining solution should be immune to any coalitional deviations. Our noncooperative approach yields a new core concept, called the Nash core, for a cooperative game based on a consistency principle. We prove that the Nash bargaining solution can be supported (in every subgame) by a stationary subgame perfect equilibrium of the bargaining game if and only if the Nash bargaining solution belongs to the Nash core.     

Stochastic stability in a double auction

In a k-double auction, a buyer and a seller must simultaneously announce a bid and an ask price respectively. Exchange of the indivisible good takes place if and only if the bid is at least as high as the ask, the trading price being the bid price with probability k and the ask price with probability (1−k). We show that the stable equilibria of a complete information k-double approximate an asymmetric Nash bargaining solution with the seller's bargaining power decreasing in k.Note that ceteris paribus, the payoffs of the seller of the one-shot game increase in k. Nevertheless, as the stochastically stable equilibrium price decreases in k, choosing the seller's favorite price with a relatively higher probability in individual encounters makes him worse off in the long run.     

Evolutionary Stability in the Investment-Opportunism-Retaliation Game

Can economically efficient outcomes be obtained and sustained in the absence of externally enforced property rights? We study the evolutionary properties of a game that exhibits two well-defined Nash equilibria: one generates an inefficient outcome while the other set generates an efficient outcome supported by the potential for retaliation. Although standard forward-looking refinements eliminate the efficient equilibrium, neither equilibrium type satisfies strict evolutionary stability criteria. However, both types of equilibrium define strategies that are neutrally stable, which makes them vulnerable to drift in dynamic environments. We conduct computer simulation experiments in which players learn adaptively via a tournament selection mechanism called sophisticated experimentation. Our simulations demonstrate that while the system spends a disproportionately high proportion of time in the inefficient equilibrium set, the efficient equilibrium is pervasive as the system drifts back and forth between the equilibrium sets, never settling on one or the other.     

The supercore for normal-form games

This paper analyzes the supercore of a system derived from a normal-form game. For the case of a finite game with pure strategies, we define a sequence of games and show that the supercore coincides with the set of Nash equilibria of the last game in that sequence. This result is illustrated with the characterization of the supercore for the n-person prisoner's dilemma. With regard to the mixed extension of a normal-form game, we show that the set of Nash equilibrium profiles coincides with the supercore for games with a finite number of Nash equilibria.     

A full characterization of nash implementation with strategy space reduction

The paper fully characterizes the class of Nash implementable social choice correspondences (SCCs) by mechanisms endowed with Saijo’s message space specification— $s$ -mechanisms. This class of SCCs is equivalent to the class of Nash implementable SCCs, though any game form involving ‘one less’ preference announcements breaks this equivalence relationship down.     

Bargaining with random implementation: An experimental study

We use a laboratory experiment to study bargaining with random implementation. We modify the standard Nash demand game so that incompatible demands do not necessarily lead to the disagreement outcome. Rather, with exogenous probability q, one bargainer receives his/her demand, with the other getting the remainder. We use an asymmetric bargaining set (favouring one bargainer) and disagreement payoffs of zero, and we vary q over several values.Our results mostly support game theoryʼs directional predictions. As with conventional arbitration, we observe a strong chilling effect on bargaining for q near one: extreme demands and low agreement rates. Increasing q reinforces the gameʼs built-in asymmetry – giving the favoured player an increasingly large share of payoffs – but also raising efficiency. These effects are non-uniform: over sizable ranges, increases in q have minimal effect, but for some q, small additional increases lead to sharp changes in results.