The Envelope Theorem and Comparative Statics of Nash Equilibria

The Envelope Theorem for Nash equilibria shows that the strategic reaction of the other players in the game is important for determining how parameter perturbations affect a given player's indirect objective function. The fundamental comparative statics matrix of Nash equilibria for theithplayer in anN-player static game includes the equilibrium response of the otherN−1players in the game to the parameter perturbation and is symmetric positive semidefinite subject to constraint. This result is fundamental in that it holds for all sufficiently smooth Nash equilibria and is independent of any curvature or stability assumptions imposed on the game.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Numbers: C72, C61.     

Cycling in a stochastic learning algorithm for normal form games

In this paper we study a stochastic learning model for 2×2 normal form games that are played repeatedly. The main emphasis is put on the emergence of cycles. We assume that the players have neither information about the payoff matrix of their opponent nor about their own. At every round each player can only observe his or her action and the payoff he or she receives. We prove that the learning algorithm, which is modeled by an urn scheme proposed by Arthur (1993), leads with positive probability to a cycling of strategy profiles if the game has a mixed Nash equilibrium. In case there are strict Nash equilibria, the learning process converges a.s. to the set of Nash equilibria.     

Congestion games with malicious players

We study the equilibria of non-atomic congestion games in which there are two types of players: rational players, who seek to minimize their own delay, and malicious players, who seek to maximize the average delay experienced by the rational players. We study the existence of pure and mixed Nash equilibria for these games, and we seek to quantify the impact of the malicious players on the equilibrium. One counterintuitive phenomenon which we demonstrate is the “windfall of malice”: paradoxically, when a myopically malicious player gains control of a fraction of the flow, the new equilibrium may be more favorable for the remaining rational players than the previous equilibrium.     

Nash equilibrium without mutual knowledge of rationality

Summary. In a Nash equilibrium, players' rationality is mutual knowledge. However, both intuition and experimental evidence suggest that players do not know for sure the rationality of opponents. This paper proposes a new equilibrium concept, cautious equilibrium, that generalizes Nash equilibrium in terms of preferences in two person strategic games. In a cautious equilibrium, players do not necessarily know the rationality of opponents, but they view rationality as infinitely more likely than irrationality. For suitable models of preference, cautious equilibrium predicts that a player might take a “cautious” strategy that is not a best response in any Nash equilibrium. Received: January 28, 1998; revised version October 2, 1998     

Equilibrium play in matches: Binary Markov games

We study two-person extensive form games, or “matches,” in which the only possible outcomes (if the game terminates) are that one player or the other is declared the winner. The winner of the match is determined by the winning of points, in “point games.” We call these matches binary Markov games. We show that if a simple monotonicity condition is satisfied, then (a) it is a Nash equilibrium of the match for the players, at each point, to play a Nash equilibrium of the point game; (b) it is a minimax behavior strategy in the match for a player to play minimax in each point game; and (c) when the point games all have unique Nash equilibria, the only Nash equilibrium of the binary Markov game consists of minimax play at each point. An application to tennis is provided.     

Mixed-strategy equilibria in the Nash Demand Game

In the Nash Demand Game, each of the two players announces the share he demands of an amount of money that may be split between them. If the demands can be satisfied, they are; otherwise, neither player receives any money. This game has many pure-strategy equilibria. This paper characterizes mixed-strategy equilibria. The condition critical for an equilibrium is that players’ sets of possible demands be balanced. Two sets of demands are balanced if each demand in one set can be matched with a demand in the other set such that they sum to one. For Nash’s original game, a complete characterization is given of the equilibria in which both players’ expected payoffs are strictly positive. The findings are applied to the private provision of a discrete public good.     

Learning by matching patterns

We analyze a model of repeated play between two boundedly rational agents. In each stage each player recalls the outcomes from the most recent few rounds, calculates the distribution of its opponent's past reactions to this outcome pattern, and then optimizes myopically against this distribution. If both players use the same pattern length then the limit points of pattern matching are in the convex hull of the limit points of fictitious play. Thus if fictitious play converges into the set of Nash equilibria then pattern matching converges into the convex hull of Nash equilibria. If the players use different pattern lengths, the more sophisticated player may, but does not generally, succeed in playing as if it could perfectly predict its opponent's play.     

Walrasian analysis via two-player games

We associate to any pure exchange economy a game with only two players, regardless of the number of consumers. In this two-player game, each player represents a different role of the society, formed by all the individuals in the economy. Player 1 selects feasible allocations trying to make Pareto improvements. Player 2 chooses an alternative from the wider range of allocations that are feasible in the sense of Aubin. The set of Nash equilibria of our game is non-empty and our main result provides a characterization of Walrasian equilibria allocations as strong Nash equilibria of the associated society game.     

Bayesian learning and convergence to Nash equilibria without common priors

Summary. Consider an infinitely repeated game where each player is characterized by a “type” which may be unknown to the other players in the game. Suppose further that each player's belief about others is independent of that player's type. Impose an absolute continuity condition on the ex ante beliefs of players (weaker than mutual absolute continuity). Then any limit point of beliefs of players about the future of the game conditional on the past lies in the set of Nash or Subjective equilibria. Our assumption does not require common priors so is weaker than Jordan (1991); however our conclusion is weaker, we obtain convergence to subjective and not necessarily Nash equilibria. Our model is a generalization of the Kalai and Lehrer (1993) model. Our assumption is weaker than theirs. However, our conclusion is also weaker, and shows that limit points of beliefs, and not actual play, are subjective equilibria. Received: March 3, 1995; revised version: February 17, 1997     

Coordination need not be a problem

In a game of common interest there is one action vector that all players prefer to every other. Yet there may be multiple Pareto-ranked Nash equilibria in the game and the “coordination problem” refers to the fact that rational equilibrium play cannot rule out Pareto-dominated equilibria. In this paper, I prove that two elements — asynchronicity and a finite horizon — are sufficient to uniquely select the Pareto-dominant action vector (in subgame perfect equilibrium play). Asynchronicity may be exogenously specified by the rules of the game. Alternatively, in a game where players choose when to move, asynchronicity may emerge as an equilibrium move outcome.     

Properties and applications of dual reduction

The dual reduction process, introduced by Myerson, allows a finite game to be reduced to a smaller-dimensional game such that any correlated equilibrium of the reduced game is an equilibrium of the original game. We study the properties and applications of this process. It is shown that generic two-player normal form games have a unique full dual reduction (a known refinement of dual reduction) and all strategies that have probability zero in all correlated equilibria are eliminated in all full dual reductions. Among other applications, we give a linear programming proof of the fact that a unique correlated equilibrium is a Nash equilibrium, and improve on a result due to Nau, Gomez-Canovas and Hansen on the geometry of Nash equilibria and correlated equilibria.     

Partial exposure in large games

In this work we introduce the notion of partial exposure, in which the players of a simultaneous-move Bayesian game are exposed to the realized types and chosen actions of a subset of the other players. We show that in any large simultaneous-move game, each player has very little regret even after being partially exposed to other players. If players are given the opportunity to be exposed to others at the expense of a small decrease in utility, players will decline this opportunity, and the original Nash equilibria of the game will survive.     

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.     

Directed Networks with Spillovers

We study noncooperative network formation in two types of directed networks. In the first type, called the model with global spillovers, the payoff of a player depends on the number of links she forms as well as the total number of links formed by all other players. In the second type, called the model with local spillovers, the payoff of a player depends on the number of links she forms and the total number of links formed by her immediate neighbors, as well as the number of links formed by players outside her neighborhood. For both classes of games we investigate the existence of pure strategy Nash equilibria and characterize the Nash networks under a number of different second order conditions on the payoff function.     

EQUILIBRIA IN NON-COOPERATIVE GAMES I: PERTURBATIONS BASED REFINEMENTS OF NASH EQUILIBRIUM

The concept of Nash equilibrium is widely used to analyse non-cooperative games. However, one of the problems with that concept is that many games have multiple equilibria. Recent work has concentrated on reducing or refining the set of Nash equilibria in some games. In this paper, we survey some equilibrium concepts based on perturbations of strategies that refine the set of Nash equilibria. We discuss the pros and cons of each concept and its relationship to the others by the use of numerous examples and intuition. It is hoped that this survey will enable the economist to consider the relevance of a particular equilibrium concept to a given economic model of interest. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Number: C72.     

The local best response criterion: An epistemic approach to equilibrium refinement

The standard refinement criteria for extensive form games, including subgame perfect, perfect, perfect Bayesian, sequential, and proper, reject important classes of reasonable Nash equilibria and accept many unreasonable Nash equilibria. This paper develops a new refinement criterion, based on epistemic game theory, that captures the concept of a Nash equilibrium that is plausible when players are rational. I call this the local best response (LBR) criterion. This criterion is conceptually simpler than the standard refinement criteria because it does not depend on out-of-equilibrium, counterfactual, or passage to the limit arguments. The LBR is also informationally richer because it clarifies the epistemic conditions that render a Nash equilibrium reasonable. The LBR criterion appears to render the traditional refinement criteria superfluous.     

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.     

Nash equilibrium when players account for the complexity of their forecasts

Nash equilibrium is often interpreted as a steady state in which each player holds the correct expectations about the other players' behavior and acts rationally. This paper investigates the robustness of this interpretation when there are small costs associated with complicated forecasts. The model consists of a two-person strategic game in which each player chooses a finite machine to implement a strategy in an infinitely repeated 2×2 game with discounting. I analyze the model using a solution concept called Nash Equilibrium with Stable Forecasts (ESF). My main results concern the structure of equilibrium machine pairs. They provide necessary and sufficient conditions on the form of equilibrium strategies and plays. In contrast to the “folk theorem,” these structural properties place severe restrictions on the set of equilibrium paths and payoffs. For example, only sequences of the one-shot Nash equilibrium can be generated by any ESF of the repeated game of chicken.     

Learning with perfect information

For extensive form games with perfect information, consider a learning process in which, at any iteration, each player unilaterally deviates to a best response to his current conjectures of others' strategies; and then updates his conjectures in accordance with the induced play of the game. We show that, for generic payoffs, the outcome of the game becomes stationary, and is consistent with Nash equilibrium. In general, if payoffs have ties or if players observe more of each others' strategies than is revealed by plays of the game, the same result holds provided a rationality constraint is imposed on unilateral deviations: no player changes his moves in subgames that he deems unreachable, unless he stands to improve his payoff there. Moreover, with this constraint, the sequence of strategies and conjectures also becomes stationary, and yields a self-confirming equilibrium.