Since 1973 I have used several three person games in coalitional form for both teaching and experimental purposes. They have been run in primarily a normative mode. The individuals have been asked to act as judges called upon to recommend a division of assets among three players. The basic use of these games has been to help to raise questions about context and solution concepts in cooperative game theory. Since 1980 the three basic games noted below have been used with five more or less similar groups of students at Yale. The games, their didactic purpose and the results from the normative suggestions as to how the players should be rewarded are noted here and then these results are compared with previous games. Furthermore, some extra sensitivity analysis problems are noted.
This paper introduces a highly simplified version of ‘sudden-death’ scoring. The basic game is as follows. With equal probability the teams toss to see who gets the ball. The team with the ball can either run or try to kick a field goal. The first team to score wins the game.
This paper is devoted to a discussion of several simple experimental games used in a series of lectures on game theory. The prime purpose of these games was to raise questions and illustrate problems in the construction of game theoretical models in the social sciences. The students were asked to make choices or to give opinions as to what imputation should be recommended as a solution in a cooperative game.
The prime purpose of this article is to illustrate some basic problems in the modelling of strategic market games with a single means of exchange or with complete markets. A simple example involving three types of traders trading in three commodities serves to make the points clear.
The prime purpose of this article is to illustrate some basic problems in the modelling of strategic market games with a single means of exchange or with complete markets. A simple example involving three types of traders trading in three commodities serves to make the points clear.
JEL Classification: 026
Keywords: Strategic market games, Numeraire, Single means of exchange
This paper is devoted to a discussion of several simple experimental games used in a series of lectures on game theory. The prime purpose of these games was to raise questions and illustrate problems in the construction of game theoretical models in the social sciences. The students were asked to make choices or to give opinions as to what imputation should be recommended as a solution in a cooperative game.
JEL Classification: 026
Keywords: Game theory, Cooperative game solutions, Strategic form, Extensive form
Since 1973 I have used several three person games in coalitional form for both teaching and experimental purposes. They have been run in primarily a normative mode. The individuals have been asked to act as judges called upon to recommend a division of assets among three players. The basic use of these games has been to help to raise questions about context and solution concepts in cooperative game theory. Since 1980 the three basic games noted below have been used with five more or less similar groups of students at Yale. The games, their didactic purpose and the results from the normative suggestions as to how the players should be rewarded are noted here and then these results are compared with previous games. Furthermore, some extra sensitivity analysis problems are noted.
JEL Classification: 026, 012
Keywords: Game theory, cooperative game solutions, sensitivity analysis problems
We introduce a model of the 2 x 2 games played by agents or subordinates of the players. We assume that each agent or subordinates of the players. We assume that each agent is not as perceptive as his commander in that he can make only two distinctions among the four outcomes whose value can be distinguished by the commanders.
We introduce a model of the 2 x 2 games played by agents or subordinates of the players. We assume that each agent or subordinates of the players. We assume that each agent is not as perceptive as his commander in that he can make only two distinctions among the four outcomes whose value can be distinguished by the commanders.
JEL Classification: 026
Keywords: Game theory, Agents, Commanders, Subordinates
This paper discusses the notion of “enough money” in strategic market games. In an economy with one money, m-1 markets and no credit, in order to be able to achieve efficient trade there must be “enough money” held by all traders. In essence “enough money” means that the noncooperative equilibrium solutions to a strategic market game is interior, in other words it is not considered by lack of liquidity. For simplicity two specific market mechanisms are described to illustrate the relationship between market structure and liquidity.
This paper discusses the notion of “enough money” in strategic market games. In an economy with one money, m-1 markets and no credit, in order to be able to achieve efficient trade there must be “enough money” held by all traders. In essence “enough money” means that the noncooperative equilibrium solutions to a strategic market game is interior, in other words it is not considered by lack of liquidity. For simplicity two specific market mechanisms are described to illustrate the relationship between market structure and liquidity.
JEL Classification: 020
Keywords: Enough money in trade, Price system, Market structure
A series of models (kept simple in order to stress the structure of the models and the nature of the questions) are described and problems are posed pertaining to a dynamic economy with various possibilities for the issuance of fiat money, credit and insurance.