Uniqueness of the index for Nash equilibria of two-player games

Summary. Given a map whose roots are the Nash equilibria of a game, each component of the equilibrium set has an associated index, defined as the local degree of the map. This note shows that for a two-player game, every map with the same roots induces the same index. Moreover, this index agrees with the Shapley index constructed from the Lemke-Howson algorithm. Received: May 30, 1996; revised version June 25, 1996     

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.     

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     

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.     

Evolutionary stability and lexicographic preferences

We explore the interaction between evolutionary stability and lexicographic preferences. To do so, we define a limit Nash equilibrium for a lexicographic game as the limit of Nash equilibria of nearby games with continuous preferences. Nash equilibria of lexicographic games are limit Nash equilibria, but not conversely. Modified evolutionarily stable strategies (Binmore and Samuelson, 1992. J. Econ. Theory 57, 278–305) are limit Nash equilibria. Modified evolutionary stability differs from “lexicographic evolutionarily stability” (defined by extending the common characterization of evolutionary stability to lexicographic preferences) in the order in which limits in the payoff space and the space of invasion barriers are taken.     

Bertrand price competition with differentiated commodities

This develops a general equilibrium, differentiated commodity version of Bertrand price competition. We study two, related market games in which buyers as well as sellers announce both quantities and prices. In the first game, buyers' strategies are artificially restricted. The Nash allocations of this game will be nearly competitive, provided that the commodities supplied by sellers are sufficiently similar. In the second game, the restriction on buyers' strategies is relaxed and a stronger solution criterion, called local perfection, is invoked. The locally perfect equilibria of the unrestricted game coincide the Nash equilibria of the restricted game.     

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.     

Competitive behavior in market games: Evidence and theory

We explore whether competitive outcomes arise in an experimental implementation of a market game, introduced by Shubik (1973) [21]. Market games obtain Pareto inferior (strict) Nash equilibria, in which some or possibly all markets are closed. We find that subjects do not coordinate on autarkic Nash equilibria, but favor more efficient Nash equilibria in which all markets are open. As the number of subjects participating in the market game increases, the Nash equilibrium they achieve approximates the associated competitive equilibrium of the underlying economy. Motivated by these findings, we provide a theoretical argument for why evolutionary forces can lead to competitive outcomes in market games.     

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.     

Homotopy methods to compute equilibria in game theory

This paper presents a survey of the use of homotopy methods in game theory. Homotopies allow for a robust computation of game-theoretic equilibria and their refinements. Homotopies are also suitable to compute equilibria that are selected by various selection theories. We present the relevant techniques underlying homotopy algorithms. We give detailed expositions of the Lemke–Howson algorithm and the van den Elzen–Talman algorithm to compute Nash equilibria in 2-person games, and the Herings–van den Elzen, Herings–Peeters, and McKelvey–Palfrey algorithms to compute Nash equilibria in general n-person games. We explain how the main ideas can be extended to compute equilibria in extensive form and dynamic games, and how homotopies can be used to compute all Nash equilibria.     

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.     

Strong Equilibrium in Congestion Games

[6]introduced the class of congestion games and proved that they always possess a Nash equilibrium in pure strategies. Here we obtain conditions for the existence of a strong equilibrium in this class of games, as well as for the equivalence of Nash and strong equilibria. We also give conditions for uniqueness and for Pareto optimality of the Nash equilibrium. Except for a natural monotonicity assumption on the utilities, the conditions are expressed only in terms of the underlying congestion game form. It turns out that avoiding a certain type of bad configuration in the strategy spaces is essential to positive results.Journal of Economic LiteratureClassification Numbers: C71, C72, D62.     

Laboratory Federalism: The Open Method of Coordination (OMC) as an Evolutionary Learning Process

In view of the concept of laboratory federalism, the Open Method of Coordination (OMC), adopted by the EU as a mode of governance, can be interpreted as an imitative learning dynamics of the type considered in evolutionary game theory. Its iterative design and focus on good practice are captured by the behavioral rule “imitate the best.” In a redistribution game with utilitarian governments and mobile welfare recipients, we compare the outcomes of imitative behavior (long‐run evolutionary equilibria) and decentralized best‐response behavior (Nash equilibria). The learning dynamics leads to coordination on a strict subset of Nash equilibria, favoring policy choices that can be sustained by a simple majority of Member States.     

Bilateral Trade Agreements and the Feasibility of Multilateral Free Trade

We studied how the pursuit of bilateral free‐trade agreements (FTAs) affects the likelihood of achieving multilateral free trade. We derive and compare the stable Nash equilibria of two games of trade liberalization: in the FTA game, each country can either form an FTA with one of its trading partners or both of them or none of them, whereas in the (restricted) No FTA game, purely bilateral FTAs are not permitted. The major result is that there exist circumstances under which the freedom to pursue (discriminatory) bilateral FTAs is necessary for achieving multilateral free trade.     

The envelope theorem for locally differentiable Nash equilibria of finite horizon differential games

Envelope theorems are established for a ubiquitous class of finite horizon differential games. The theorems cover open-loop and feedback information patterns in which the corresponding Nash equilibria are locally differentiable with respect to the parameters of the game. Their relationship with extant envelope results is discussed and an application of them to a generalized capital accumulation game is provided. An important implication of the theorems is that, in general, the archetypal economic interpretation of the costate vector, namely, as the shadow value of the state vector along the Nash equilibrium, is valid for feedback Nash equilibria, but not for open-loop Nash equilibria.     

Nash Equilibrium and Welfare Optimality

If A is a set of social alternatives, a social choice rule (SCR) assigns a subset of A to each potential profile of individuals' preferences over A , where the subset is interpreted as the set of "welfare optima". A game form (or "mechanism") implements the social choice rule if, for any potential profile of preferences, (i) any welfare optimum can arise as a Nash equilibrium of the game form (implying, in particular, that a Nash equilibrium exists) and, (ii) all Nash equilibria are welfare optimal. The main result of this paper establishes that any SCR that satisfies two properties—monotonicity and no veto power—can be implemented by a game form if there are three or more individuals. The proof is constructive.     

Voluntary Contributions to Multiple Public Projects

The problem of financing a set of discrete public goods (facilities, projects) by private contributions is studied. The corresponding cooperative game, the realization game , is shown to be convex. For the noncooperative setting we study a realization scheme that induces a strategic game. This contribution game is shown to be a generalized ordinal potential game ; a best–response in the contribution game implies a best response in a coordination game in which the payoff to all players is the utilitarian collective welfare function, i.e., the sum of the utility functions of the players. Strategy profiles maximizing utilitarian welfare are strong Nash equilibria of the contribution game. Each strong Nash equilibrium corresponds in a natural way with a core element of the realization game, and vice versa. Moreover, each strong Nash equilibrium is coalitional proof.     

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.     

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.     

Instability in the implementation of Walrasian allocations

The existence of game forms which implement Walrasian allocations as Cournot (Nash) equilibrium outcomes is well known. However, if the equilibria are also required to be locally dynamically stable, at least for environments with unique Walrasian allocations, this paper shows that the requisite game forms do not exist. Our definition of a game form entails certain regularity conditions, and requires the Cournot equilibrium to be unique when the Walrasian equilibrium is unique. The main result is that for such a game form, there does not exist a continuous-time strategy adjustment process which ensures the local stability of Cournot equilibria throughout a certain class of environments having unique Walrasian equilibria. Each trader adjusts his strategy in response to his own characteristics and the observed current strategies of others; but the direction and magnitude of adjustments are not constrained by any behavioral assumptions. The definitions permit the inclusion of an artificial player, such as an auctioneer, so the well-known tatonnement instability emerges as a special case.