Belief‐Free Equilibria in Games With Incomplete Information

We define belief‐free equilibria in two‐player games with incomplete information as sequential equilibria for which players' continuation strategies are best replies after every history, independently of their beliefs about the state of nature. We characterize a set of payoffs that includes all belief‐free equilibrium payoffs. Conversely, any payoff in the interior of this set is a belief‐free equilibrium payoff. The characterization is applied to the analysis of reputations.     

Bargaining,Reputation, and Equilibrium Selection in Repeated Games with Contracts

Consider a two‐person intertemporal bargaining problem in which players choose actions and offers each period, and collect payoffs (as a function of that period's actions) while bargaining proceeds. This can alternatively be viewed as an infinitely repeated game wherein players can offer one another enforceable contracts that govern play for the rest of the game. Theory is silent with regard to how the surplus is likely to be split, because a folk theorem applies. Perturbing such a game with a rich set of behavioral types for each player yields a specific asymptotic prediction for how the surplus will be divided, as the perturbation probabilities approach zero. Behavioral types may follow nonstationary strategies and respond to the opponent's play. In equilibrium, rational players initially choose a behavioral type to imitate and a war of attrition ensues. How much should a player try to get and how should she behave while waiting for the resolution of bargaining? In both respects she should build her strategy around the advice given by the “Nash bargaining with threats” (NBWT) theory developed for two‐stage games. In any perfect Bayesian equilibrium, she can guarantee herself virtually her NBWT payoff by imitating a behavioral type with the following simple strategy: in every period, ask for (and accept nothing less than) that player's NBWT share and, while waiting for the other side to concede, take the action Nash recommends as a threat in his two‐stage game. The results suggest that there are forces at work in some dynamic games that favor certain payoffs over all others. This is in stark contrast to the classic folk theorems, to the further folk theorems established for repeated games with two‐sided reputational perturbations, and to the permissive results obtained in the literature on bargaining with payoffs as you go.     

Rushes in Large Timing Games

We develop a continuum player timing game that subsumes standard wars of attrition and pre‐emption games, and introduces a new rushes phenomenon. Payoffs are continuous and single‐peaked functions of the stopping time and stopping quantile. We show that if payoffs are hump‐shaped in the quantile, then a sudden “rush” of players stops in any Nash or subgame perfect equilibrium. Fear relaxes the first mover advantage in pre‐emption games, asking that the least quantile beat the average; greed relaxes the last mover advantage in wars of attrition, asking just that the last quantile payoff exceed the average. With greed, play is inefficiently late: an accelerating war of attrition starting at optimal time, followed by a rush. With fear, play is inefficiently early: a slowing pre‐emption game, ending at the optimal time, preceded by a rush. The theory predicts the length, duration, and intensity of stopping, and the size and timing of rushes, and offers insights for many common timing games.     

On the Existence of Pure and Mixed Strategy Nash Equilibria in Discontinuous Games

A game is better-reply secure if for every nonequilibrium strategy x^* and every payoff vector limit u^* resulting from strategies approaching x^*, some player i has a strategy yielding a payoff strictly above u_i^* even if the others deviate slightly from x^*. If strategy spaces are compact and convex, payoffs are quasiconcave in the owner's strategy, and the game is better-reply secure, then a pure strategy Nash equilibrium exists. Better-reply security holds in many economic games. It also permits new results on the existence of symmetric and mixed strategy Nash equilibria.     

Fast Equilibrium Selection by Rational Players Living in a Changing World

We study a coordination game with randomly changing payoffs and small frictions in changing actions. Using only backwards induction, we find that players must coordinate on the risk‐dominant equilibrium. More precisely, a continuum of fully rational players are randomly matched to play a symmetric 2×2 game. The payoff matrix changes according to a random walk. Players observe these payoffs and the population distribution of actions as they evolve. The game has frictions: opportunities to change strategies arrive from independent random processes, so that the players are locked into their actions for some time. As the frictions disappear, each player ignores what the others are doing and switches at her first opportunity to the risk‐dominant action. History dependence emerges in some cases when frictions remain positive.     

Repeated Games with Differential Time Preferences

When players have identical time preferences, the set of feasible repeated game payoffs coincides with the convex hull of the underlying stage- game payoffs. Moreover, all feasible and individually rational payoffs can be sustained by equilibria if the players are sufficiently patient. Neither of these facts generalizes to the case of different time preferences. First, players can mutually benefit from trading payoffs across time. Hence, the set of feasible repeated game payoffs is typically larger than the convex hull of the underlying stage-game payoffs. Second, it is not usually the case that every trade plan that guarantees individually rational payoffs can be sustained by an equilibrium, no matter how patient the players are. This paper provides a simple characterization of the sets of Nash and of subgame perfect equilibrium payoffs in two-player repeated games.     

Who's Who in Networks. Wanted: The Key Player

Finite population noncooperative games with linear‐quadratic utilities, where each player decides how much action she exerts, can be interpreted as a network game with local payoff complementarities, together with a globally uniform payoff substitutability component and an own‐concavity effect. For these games, the Nash equilibrium action of each player is proportional to her Bonacich centrality in the network of local complementarities, thus establishing a bridge with the sociology literature on social networks. This Bonacich–Nash linkage implies that aggregate equilibrium increases with network size and density. We then analyze a policy that consists of targeting the key player, that is, the player who, once removed, leads to the optimal change in aggregate activity. We provide a geometric characterization of the key player identified with an intercentrality measure, which takes into account both a player's centrality and her contribution to the centrality of the others.     

A Note on the Equilibrium Existence Problem in Discontinuous Games

In this note, we prove an equilibrium existence theorem for games with discontinuous payoffs and convex and compact strategy spaces. It generalizes the classical result of Reny (1999), as well as the recent paper of McLennan, Monteiro, and Tourky (2011). Our conditions are simple and easy to verify. Importantly, examples of spatial location models show that our conditions allow for economically meaningful payoff discontinuities, that are not covered by other conditions in the literature.     

Recursive Methods in Discounted Stochastic Games: An Algorithm for δ→ 1 and a Folk Theorem

We present an algorithm to compute the set of perfect public equilibrium payoffs as the discount factor tends to 1 for stochastic games with observable states and public (but not necessarily perfect) monitoring when the limiting set of (long‐run players') equilibrium payoffs is independent of the initial state. This is the case, for instance, if the Markov chain induced by any Markov strategy profile is irreducible. We then provide conditions under which a folk theorem obtains: if in each state the joint distribution over the public signal and next period's state satisfies some rank condition, every feasible payoff vector above the minmax payoff is sustained by a perfect public equilibrium with low discounting.     

Belief‐Free Equilibria in Repeated Games

We introduce a class of strategies that generalizes examples constructed in two‐player games under imperfect private monitoring. A sequential equilibrium is belief‐free if, after every private history, each player's continuation strategy is optimal independently of his belief about his opponents' private histories. We provide a simple and sharp characterization of equilibrium payoffs using those strategies. While such strategies support a large set of payoffs, they are not rich enough to generate a folk theorem in most games besides the prisoner's dilemma, even when noise vanishes.     

Linear programming approach to solve interval-valued matrix games

Matrix game theory is concerned with how two players make decisions when they are faced with known exact payoffs. The aim of this paper is to develop a simple and an effective linear programming method for solving matrix games in which the payoffs are expressed with intervals. Because the payoffs of the matrix game are intervals, the value of the matrix game is an interval as well. Based on the definition of the value for matrix games, the value of the matrix game may be regarded as a function of values in the payoff intervals, which is proven to be non-decreasing. A pair of auxiliary linear programming models is formulated to obtain the upper bound and the lower bound of the value of the interval-valued matrix game by using the upper bounds and the lower bounds of the payoff intervals, respectively. By the duality theorem of linear programming, it is proven that two players have the identical interval-type value of the interval-valued matrix game. Also it is proven that the linear programming models and method proposed in this paper extend those of the classical matrix games. The linear programming method proposed in this paper is demonstrated with a real investment decision example and compared with other similar methods to show the validity, applicability and superiority.     

Isotone Equilibrium in Games of Incomplete Information

An isotone pure strategy equilibrium exists in any game of incomplete information in which each player's action set is a finite sublattice of multidimensional Euclidean space, types are multidimensional and atomless, and each player's interim expected payoff function satisfies two “nonprimitive conditions” whenever others adopt isotone pure strategies: (i) single‐crossing in own action and type and (ii) quasi‐supermodularity in own action. Conditions (i), (ii) are satisfied in supermodular and log‐supermodular games given affiliated types,and in games with independent types in which each player's ex post payoff satisfies supermodularity in own action and nondecreasing differences in own action and type. This result is applied to provide the first proof of pure strategy equilibrium existence in the uniform price auction when bidders have multi‐unit demand, nonprivate values, and independent types.     

Revealed Altruism1

This paper develops a nonparametric theory of preferences over one's own and others' monetary payoffs. We introduce “more altruistic than” (MAT), a partial ordering over such preferences, and interpret it with known parametric models. We also introduce and illustrate “more generous than” (MGT), a partial ordering over opportunity sets. Several recent studies focus on two‐player extensive form games of complete information in which the first mover (FM) chooses a more or less generous opportunity set for the second mover (SM). Here reciprocity can be formalized as the assertion that an MGT choice by the FM will elicit MAT preferences in the SM. A further assertion is that the effect on preferences is stronger for acts of commission by FM than for acts of omission. We state and prove propositions on the observable consequences of these assertions. Finally, empirical support for the propositions is found in existing data from investment and dictator games, the carrot and stick game, and the Stackelberg duopoly game and in new data from Stackelberg mini‐games.     

Bounded Memory and Biases in Information Processing

Before choosing among two actions with state‐dependent payoffs, a Bayesian decision‐maker with a finite memory sees a sequence of informative signals, ending each period with fixed chance. He summarizes information observed with a finite‐state automaton. I characterize the optimal protocol as an equilibrium of a dynamic game of imperfect recall; a new player runs each memory state each period. Players act as if maximizing expected payoffs in a common finite action decision problem. I characterize equilibrium play with many multinomial signals. The optimal protocol rationalizes many behavioral phenomena, like “stickiness,” salience, confirmation bias, and belief polarization.     

Learning While Voting: Determinants of Collective Experimentation

This paper combines dynamic social choice and strategic experimentation to study the following question: How does a society, a committee, or, more generally, a group of individuals with potentially heterogeneous preferences, experiment with new opportunities? Each voter recognizes that, during experimentation, other voters also learn about their preferences. As a result, pivotal voters today are biased against experimentation because it reduces their likelihood of remaining pivotal. This phenomenon reduces equilibrium experimentation below the socially efficient level, and may even result in a negative option value of experimentation. However, one can restore efficiency by designing a voting rule that depends deterministically on time. Another main result is that even when payoffs of a reform are independently distributed across the population, good news about any individual's payoff increases other individuals' incentives to experiment with that reform, due to a positive voting externality.     

Noisy Stochastic Games

This paper establishes existence of a stationary Markov perfect equilibrium in general stochastic games with noise—a component of the state that is nonatomically distributed and not directly affected by the previous period's state and actions. Noise may be simply a payoff‐irrelevant public randomization device, delivering known results on the existence of correlated equilibrium as a special case. More generally, noise can take the form of shocks that enter into players' stage payoffs and the transition probability on states. The existence result is applied to a model of industry dynamics and to a model of dynamic electoral competition.     

The Theory of Global Games on Test: Experimental Analysis of Coordination Games with Public and Private Information

The theory of global games has shown that coordination games with multiple equilibria may have a unique equilibrium if certain parameters of the payoff function are private information instead of common knowledge. We report the results of an experiment designed to test the predictions of this theory. Comparing sessions with common and private information, we observe only small differences in behavior. For common information, subjects coordinate on threshold strategies that deviate from the global game solution towards the payoff‐dominant equilibrium. For private information, thresholds are closer to the global game solution than for common information. Variations in the payoff function affect behavior as predicted by comparative statics of the global game solution. Predictability of coordination points is about the same for both information conditions.     

Repeated Games Where the Payoffs and Monitoring Structure Are Unknown

This paper studies repeated games with imperfect public monitoring where the players are uncertain both about the payoff functions and about the relationship between the distribution of signals and the actions played. We introduce the concept of perfect public ex post equilibrium (PPXE), and show that it can be characterized with an extension of the techniques used to study perfect public equilibria. We develop identifiability conditions that are sufficient for a folk theorem; these conditions imply that there are PPXE in which the payoffs are approximately the same as if the monitoring structure and payoff functions were known. Finally, we define perfect type‐contingently public ex post equilibria (PTXE), which allows players to condition their actions on their initial private information, and we provide its linear programming characterization.     

Social Indeterminacy

An extension of Condorcet's paradox by McGarvey (1953) asserts that for every asymmetric relation R on a finite set of candidates there is a strict‐preferences voter profile that has the relation R as its strict simple majority relation. We prove that McGarvey's theorem can be extended to arbitrary neutral monotone social welfare functions that can be described by a strong simple game G if the voting power of each individual, measured by the Shapley–Shubik power index, is sufficiently small. Our proof is based on an extension to another classic result concerning the majority rule. Condorcet studied an election between two candidates in which the voters' choices are random and independent and the probability of a voter choosing the first candidate is p>1/2. Condorcet's jury theorem asserts that if the number of voters tends to infinity then the probability that the first candidate will be elected tends to one. We prove that this assertion extends to a sequence of arbitrary monotone strong simple games if and only if the maximum voting power for all individuals tends to zero.     

Long Cheap Talk

With cheap talk, more can be achieved by long conversations than by a single message—even when one side is strictly better informed than the other. (“Cheap talk” means plain conversation—unmediated, nonbinding, and payoff‐irrelevant.) This work characterizes the equilibrium payoffs for all two‐person games in which one side is better informed than the other and cheap talk is permitted.