耶鲁大学博弈论_精简版

合集下载

耶鲁大学公开课英文讲义—博弈论第一节

耶鲁大学公开课英文讲义—博弈论第一节

Game Theory: Lecture 1 TranscriptProfessor Ben Polak: So this is Game Theory Economics 159. If you're here for art history, you're either in the wrong room or stay anyway, maybe this is the right room; but this is Game Theory, okay. You should have four handouts; everyone should have four handouts. There is a legal release form--we'll talk about it in a minute--about the videoing. There is a syllabus, which is a preliminary syllabus: it's also online. And there are two games labeled Game 1 and Game 2. Can I get you all to look at Game 1 and start thinking about it. And while you're thinking about it, I am hoping you can multitask a bit. I'll describe a bit about the class and we'll get a bit of admin under our belts. But please try and look at--somebody's not looking at it, because they're using it as a fan here--so look at Game 1 and fill out that form for me, okay?So while you're filling that out, let me tell you a little bit about what we're going to be doing here. So what is Game Theory? Game Theory is a method of studying strategic situations. So what's a strategic situation? Well let's start off with what's not a strategic situation. In your Economics - in your Intro Economics class in 115 or 110, you saw some pretty good examples of situations that were not strategic. You saw firms working in perfect competition. Firms in perfect competition are price takers: they don't particularly have to worry about the actions of their competitors. You also saw firms that were monopolists and monopolists don't have any competitors to worry about, so that's not a particularly strategic situation. They're not price takers but they take the demand curve. Is this looking familiar for some of you who can remember doing 115 last year or maybe two years ago for some of you? Everything in between is strategic. So everything that constitutes imperfect competition is a strategic setting. Think about the motor industry, the motor car industry. Ford has to worry about what GM is doing and what Toyota is doing, and for the moment at least what Chrysler is doing but perhaps not for long. So there's a small number of firms and their actions affect each other.So for a literal definition of what strategic means: it's a setting where the outcomes that affect you depend on actions, not just on your own actions, but on actions of others. All right, that's as much as I'm going to say for preview right now, we're going to come back and see plenty of this over the course of the next semester.So what I want to do is get on to where this applies. It obviously applies in Economics, but it also applies in politics, and in fact, this class will count as a Political Science class if you're a Political Science major. You should go check with the DUS in Political Science. It count - Game Theory is very important in law these days. So for those of you--for the half of you--that aregoing to end up in law school, this is pretty good training. Game Theory is also used in biology and towards the middle of the semester we're actually going to see some examples of Game Theory as applied to evolution. And not surprisingly, Game Theory applies to sport.So let's talk about a bit of admin. How are you doing on filling out those games? Everyone managing to multitask: filling in Game 1? Keep writing. I want to get some admin out of the way and I want to start by getting out of the way what is obviously the elephant in the room. Some of you will have noticed that there's a camera crew here, okay. So as some of you probably know, Yale is undergoing an open education project and they're videoing several classes, and the idea of this, is to make educational materials available beyond the walls of Yale. In fact, on the web, internationally, so people in places, maybe places in the U.S. or places miles away, maybe in Timbuktu or whatever, who find it difficult to get educational materials from the local university or whatever, can watch certain lectures from Yale on the web.Some of you would have been in classes that do that before. What's going to different about this class is that you're going to be participating in it. The way we teach this class is we're going to play games, we're going to have discussions, we're going to talk among the class, and you're going to be learning from each other, and I want you to help people watching at home to be able to learn too. And that means you're going to be on film, at the very least on mike.So how's that going to work? Around the room are three T.A.s holding mikes. Let me show you where they are: one here, one here, and one here. When I ask for classroom discussions, I'm going to have one of the T.A.s go to you with a microphone much like in "Donahue" or something, okay. At certain times, you're going to be seen on film, so the camera is actually going to come around and point in your direction.Now I really want this to happen. I had to argue for this to happen, cause I really feel that this class isn't about me. I'm part of the class obviously, but it's about you teaching each other and participating. But there's a catch, the catch is, that that means you have to sign that legal release form.So you'll see that you have in front of you a legal release form, you have to be able to sign it, and what that says is that we can use you being shown in class. Think of this as a bad hair day release form. All right, you can't sue Yale later if you had a bad hair day. For those of you who are on the run from the FBI, your Visa has run out, or you're sitting next to your ex-girlfriend, now would be a good time to put a paper bag over your head.All right, now just to get you used to the idea, in every class we're going to have I think the same two people, so Jude is the cameraman; why don't you all wave to Jude: this is Jude okay. And Wes is our audio guy: this is Wes. And I will try and remember not to include Jude and Wes in the classroom discussions, but you should be aware that they're there. Now, if this is making you nervous, if it's any consolation, it's making me very nervous. So, all right, we'll try and make this class work as smoothly as we can, allowing for this extra thing. Let me just say, no one's making any money off this--at least I'm hoping these guys are being paid--but me and the T.A.s are not being paid. The aim of this, that I think is a good aim, it's an educational project, and I'm hoping you'll help us with it. The one difference it is going to mean, is that at times I might hold some of the discussions for the class, coming down into this part of the room, here, to make it a little easier for Jude.All right, how are we doing now on filling out those forms? Has everyone filled in their strategy for the first game? Not yet. Okay, let's go on doing a bit more admin. The thing you mostly care about I'm guessing, is the grades. All right, so how is the grade going to work for this class? 30% of the class will be on problem sets, 30% of the grade; 30% on the mid-term, and 40% on the final; so 30/30/40.The mid-term will be held in class on October 17th; that is also in your syllabus. Please don't anybody tell me late - any time after today you didn't know when the mid-term was and therefore it clashes with 17 different things. The mid-term is on October 17th, which is a Wednesday, in class. All right, the problem sets: there will be roughly ten problem sets and I'll talk about them more later on when I hand them out. The first one will go out on Monday but it will be due ten days later. Roughly speaking they'll be every week.The grade distribution: all right, so this is the rough grade distribution. Roughly speaking, a sixth of the class are going to end up with A's, a sixth are going to end up with A-, a sixth are going to end up with B+, a sixth are going to end up with B, a sixth are going to end up with B-, and the remaining sixth, if I added that up right, are going to end up with what I guess we're now calling the presidential grade, is that right?That's not literally true. I'm going to squeeze it a bit, I'm going to curve it a bit, so actually slightly fewer than a sixth will get straight A's, and fewer than a sixth will get C's and below. We'll squeeze the middle to make them be more B's. One thing I can guarantee from past experience in this class, is that the median grade will be a B+. The median will fall somewhere in the B+'s. Just as forewarning for people who have forgotten what a median is,that means half of you--not approximately half, it means exactly half of you--will be getting something like B+ and below and half will get something like B+ and above.Now, how are you doing in filling in the forms? Everyone filled them in yet? Surely must be pretty close to getting everyone filled in. All right, so last things to talk about before I actually collect them in - textbooks. There are textbooks for this class. The main textbook is this one, Dutta'sbook Strategy and Games. If you want a slightly tougher book, more rigorous book, try Joel Watson's book, Strategies. Both of those books are available at the bookstore.But I want to warn everybody ahead of time, I will not be following the textbook. I regard these books as safety nets. If you don't understand something that happened in class, you want to reinforce an idea that came up in class, then you should read the relevant chapters in the book and the syllabus will tell you which chapters to read for each class, or for each week of class, all right. But I will not be following these books religiously at all. In fact, they're just there as back up.In addition, I strongly recommend people read, Thinking Strategically. This is good bedtime reading. Do any of you suffer from insomnia? It's very good bedtime reading if you suffer from insomnia. It's a good book and what's more there's going to be a new edition of this book this year and Norton have allowed us to get advance copies of it. So if you don't buy this book this week, I may be able to make the advance copy of the new edition available for some of you next week. I'm not taking a cut on that either, all right, there's no money changing hands.All right, sections are on the syllabus sign up - sorry on the website, sign up as usual. Put yourself down on the wait list if you don't get into the section you want. You probably will get into the section you want once we're done. All right, now we must be done with the forms. Are we done with the forms? All right, so why don't we send the T.A.s, with or without mikes, up and down the aisles and collect in your Game #1; not Game #2, just Game #1.Just while we're doing that, I think the reputation of this class--I think--if you look at the course evaluations online or whatever, is that this class is reasonably hard but reasonably fun. So I'm hoping that's what the reputation of the class is. If you think this class is going to be easy, I think it isn't actually an easy class. It's actually quite a hard class, but I think I can guarantee it's going to be a fun class. Now one reason it's a fun class, is the nice thing about teaching Game Theory - quieten down folks--one thing about teaching Game Theory is, you get to play games, and that's exactlywhat we've just been doing now. This is our first game and we're going to play games throughout the course, sometimes several times a week, sometimes just once a week.We got all these things in? Everyone handed them in? So I need to get those counted. Has anyone taken the Yale Accounting class? No one wants to - has aspirations to be - one person has. I'll have a T.A. do it, it's all right,we'll have a T.A. do it. So Kaj, can you count those for me? Is that right? Let me read out the game you've just played."Game 1, a simple grade scheme for the class. Read the following carefully. Without showing your neighbor what you are doing, put it in the box below either the letter Alpha or the letter Beta. Think of this as a grade bid. I will randomly pair your form with another form and neither you nor your pair will ever know with whom you were paired. Here's how the grades may be assigned for the class. [Well they won't be, but we can pretend.] If you put Alpha and you're paired with Beta, then you will get an A and your pair a C. If you and your pair both put Alpha, you'll both get B-. If you put Beta and you're paired with Alpha, you'll get a C and your pair an A. If you and your pair both put Beta, then you'll both get B+."So that's the thing you just filled in.Now before we talk about this, let's just collect this information in a more useful way. So I'm going to remove this for now. We'll discuss this in a second, but why don't we actually record what the game is, that we're playing, first. So this is our grade game, and what I'm going to do, since it's kind of hard to absorb all the information just by reading a paragraph of text, I'm going to make a table to record the information. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to put me here, and my pair, the person I'm randomly paired with here, and Alpha and Beta, which are the choices I'm going to make here and on the columns Alpha and Beta, the choices my pair is making.In this table, I'm going to put my grades. So my grade if we both put Alpha is B-, if we both put Beta, was B+. If I put Alpha and she put a Beta, I got an A, and if I put Beta and she put an Alpha, I got a C. Is that correct? That's more or less right? Yeah, okay while we're here, why don't we do the same for my pair? So this is my grades on the left hand table, but now let's look at what my pair will do, what my pair will get.So I should warn the people sitting at the back that my handwriting is pretty bad, that's one reason for moving forward. The other thing I should apologize at this stage of the class is my accent. I will try and improve the handwriting, there's not much I can do about the accent at this stage.So once again if you both put Alpha then my pair gets a B-. If we both put Beta, then we both get a B+; in particular, my pair gets a B+. If I put Alpha and my pair puts Beta, then she gets a C. And if I put Beta and she puts Alpha, then she gets an A. So I now have all the information that was on the sheet of paper that you just handed in.Now there's another way of organizing this that's standard in Game Theory, so we may as well get used to it now on the first day. Rather then drawing two different tables like this, what I'm going to do is I'm going to take the second table and super-impose it on top of the first table. Okay, so let me do that and you'll see what I mean. What I'm going to do is draw a larger table, the same basic structure: I'm choosing Alpha and Beta on the rows, my pair is choosing Alpha and Beta on the columns, but now I'm going to put both grades in. So the easy ones are on the diagonal: you both get B- if we both choose Alpha; we both get B+ if we both choose Beta. But if I choose Alpha and my pair chooses Beta, I get an A and she gets a C. And if I choose Beta and she chooses Alpha, then it's me who gets the C and it's her who gets the A.So notice what I did here. The first grade corresponds to the row player, me in this case, and the second grade in each box corresponds to the column player, my pair in this case. So this is a nice succinct way of recording what was in the previous two tables. This is an outcome matrix; this tells us everything that was in the game.Okay, so now seems a good time to start talking about what people did. So let's just have a show of hands. How many of you chose Alpha? Leave your hands up so that Jude can catch that, so people can see at home, okay. All right and how many of you chose Beta? There's far more Alphas - wave your hands the Beta's okay. All right, there's a Beta here, okay. So it looks like a lot of - well we're going to find out, we're going to count--but a lot more Alpha's than Beta's. Let me try and find out some reasons why people chose.So let me have the Alpha's up again. So, the woman who's in red here, can we get a mike to the - yeah, is it okay if we ask you? You're not on the run from the FBI? We can ask you why? Okay, so you chose Alpha right? So why did you choose Alpha?Student: [inaudible] realized that my partner chose Alpha, therefore I chose [inaudible].Professor Ben Polak: All right, so you wrote out these squares, you realized what your partner was going to do, and responded to that. Any otherreasons for choosing Alpha around the room? Can we get the woman here? Try not to be intimidated by these microphones, they're just mikes. It's okay.Student: The reason I chose Alpha, regardless of what my partner chose, I think there would be better outcomes than choosing Beta.Professor Ben Polak: All right, so let me ask your names for a second-so your name was?Student: Courtney.Professor Ben Polak: Courtney and your name was?Student: Clara Elise.Professor Ben Polak: Clara Elise. So slightly different reasons, same choice Alpha. Clara Elise's reason - what did Clara Elise say? She said, no matter what the other person does, she reckons she'd get a better grade if she chose Alpha. So hold that thought a second, we'll come back to - is it Clara Elise, is that right? We'll come back to Clara Elise in a second. Let's talk to the Beta's a second; let me just emphasize at this stage there are no wrong answers. Later on in the class there'll be some questions that have wrong answers. Right now there's no wrong answers. There may be bad reasons but there's no wrong answers. So let's have the Beta's up again. Let's see the Beta's. Oh come on! There was a Beta right here. You were a Beta right? You backed off the Beta, okay. So how can I get a mike into a Beta? Let' s stick in this aisle a bit. Is that a Beta right there? Are you a Beta right there? Can I get the Beta in here? Who was the Beta in here? Can we get the mike in there? Is that possible? In here - you can leave your hand so that - there we go. Just point towards - that's fine, just speak into it, that's fine. Student: So the reason right?Professor Ben Polak: Yeah, go ahead.Student: I personally don't like swings that much and it's the B-/B+ range, so I'd much rather prefer that to a swing from A to C, and that's my reason. Professor Ben Polak: All right, so you're saying it compresses the range.I'm not sure it does compress the range. I mean if you chose Alpha, you're swinging from A to B-; and from Beta, swinging from B+ to C. I mean those are similar kind of ranges but it certainly is a reason. Other reasons for choosing? Yeah, the guy in blue here, yep, good. That's all right. Don't hold the mike; just let it point at you, that's fine.Student: Well I guess I thought we could be more collusive and kind of work together, but I guess not. So I chose Beta.Professor Ben Polak: There's a siren in the background so I missed the answer. Stand up a second, so we can just hear you.Student: Sure.Professor Ben Polak: Sorry, say again.Student: Sure. My name is Travis. I thought we could work together, but I guess not.Professor Ben Polak: All right good. That's a pretty good reason. Student: If you had chosen Beta we would have all gotten B+'s but I guess not.Professor Ben Polak: Good, so Travis is giving us a different reason, right? He's saying that maybe, some of you in the room might actually care about each other's grades, right? I mean you all know each other in class. You all go to the same college. For example, if we played this game up in the business school--are there any MBA students here today? One or two. If we play this game up in the business school, I think it's quite likely we're going to get a lot of Alpha's chosen, right? But if we played this game up in let's say the Divinity School, all right and I'm guessing that Travis' answer is reflecting what you guys are reasoning here. If you played in the Divinity School, you might think that people in the Divinity School might care about other people's grades, right? There might be ethical reasons--perfectly good, sensible, ethical reasons--for choosing Beta in this game. There might be other reasons as well, but that's perhaps the reason to focus on. And perhaps, the lesson I want to draw out of this is that right now this is not a game. Right now we have actions, strategies for people to take, and we know what the outcomes are, but we're missing something that will make this a game. What are we missing here?Student: Objectives.Professor Ben Polak: We're missing objectives. We're missing payoffs. We're missing what people care about, all right. So we can't really start analyzing a game until we know what people care about, and until we know what the payoffs are. Now let's just say something now, which I'll probably forget to say in any other moment of the class, but today it's relevant.Game Theory, me, professors at Yale, cannot tell you what your payoff should be. I can't tell you in a useful way what it is that your goals in life should be or whatever. That's not what Game Theory is about. However, once we know what your payoffs are, once we know what your goals are, perhaps Game Theory can you help you get there.So we've had two different kinds of payoffs mentioned here. We had the kind of payoff where we care about our own grade, and Travis has mentioned the kind of payoff where you might care about other people's grades. And what we're going to do today is analyze this game under both those possible payoffs. To start that off, let's put up some possible payoffs for the game. And I promise we'll come back and look at some other payoffs later. We'll revisit the Divinity School later.All right, so here once again is our same matrix with me and my pair, choosing actions Alpha and Beta, but this time I'm going to put numbers in here. And some of you will perhaps recognize these numbers, but that's not really relevant for now. All right, so what's the idea here? Well the first idea is that these numbers represent utiles or utilities. They represent what these people are trying to maximize, what they're to achieve, their goals.The idea is - just to compare this to the outcome matrix - for the person who's me here, (A,C) yields a payoff of--(A,C) is this box--so (A,C) yields a payoff of three, whereas (B-,B-) yields a payoff of 0, and so on. So what's the interpretation? It's the first interpretation: the natural interpretation that a lot of you jumped to straight away. These are people--people with these payoffs are people--who only care about their own grades. They prefer an A to a B+, they prefer a B+ to a B-, and they prefer a B- to a C. Right, I'm hoping I the grades in order, otherwise it's going to ruin my curve at the end of the year. So these people only care about their own grades. They only care about their own grades.What do we call people who only care about their own grades? What's a good technical term for them? In England, I think we refer to these guys - whether it's technical or not - as "evil gits." These are not perhaps the most moral people in the universe. So now we can ask a different question. Suppose, whether these are actually your payoffs or not, pretend they are for now. Suppose these are all payoffs. Now we can ask, not what did you do, but what should you do? Now we have payoffs that can really switch the question to a normative question: what should you do? Let's come back to - was it Clara Elise--where was Clara Elise before? Let's get the mike on you again. So just explain what you did and why again.Student: Why I chose Alpha?Professor Ben Polak: Yeah, stand up a second, if that's okay.Student: Okay.Professor Ben Polak: You chose Alpha; I'm assuming these were roughly your payoffs, more or less, you were caring about your grades.Student: Yeah, I was thinking -Professor Ben Polak: Why did you choose Alpha?Student: I'm sorry?Professor Ben Polak: Why did you choose Alpha? Just repeat what you said before.Student: Because I thought the payoffs - the two different payoffs that I could have gotten--were highest if I chose Alpha.Professor Ben Polak: Good; so what Clara Elise is saying--it's an important idea--is this (and tell me if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly but I think this is more or less what you're saying): is no matter what the other person does, no matter what the pair does, she obtains a higher payoff by choosing Alpha. Let's just see that. If the pair chooses Alpha and she chooses Alpha, then she gets 0. If the pair chooses Alpha and she chose Beta, she gets -1. 0 is bigger than -1. If the pair chooses Beta, then if she chooses Alpha she gets 3, Beta she gets 1, and 3 is bigger than 1. So in both cases, no matter what the other person does, she receives a higher payoff from choosing Alpha, so she should choose Alpha. Does everyone follow that line of reasoning? That's a stronger line of reasoning then the reasoning we had earlier. So the woman, I have immediately forgotten the name of, in the red shirt, whose name was -Student: Courtney.Professor Ben Polak: Courtney, so Courtney also gave a reason for choosing Alpha, and it was a perfectly good reason for choosing Alpha, nothing wrong with it, but notice that this reason's a stronger reason. It kind of implies your reason.So let's get some definitions down here. I think I can fit it in here. Let's try and fit it in here.Definition: We say that my strategy Alpha strictly dominates my strategy Beta, if my payoff from Alpha is strictly greater than that from Beta, [and this is the key part of the definition], regardless of what others do.Shall we just read that back? "We say that my strategy Alpha strictly dominates my strategy Beta, if my payoff from Alpha is strictly greater than that from Beta, regardless of what others do." Now it's by no means my main aim in this class to teach you jargon. But a few bits of jargon are going to be helpful in allowing the conversation to move forward and this is certainly one. "Evil gits" is maybe one too, but this is certainly one.Let's draw out some lessons from this. Actually, so you can still read that, let me bring down and clean this board. So the first lesson of the class, and there are going to be lots of lessons, is a lesson that emerges immediately from the definition of a dominated strategy and it's this. So Lesson One of the course is:do not play a strictly dominated strategy. So with apologies to Strunk and White, this is in the passive form, that's dominated, passive voice. Do not play a strictly dominated strategy. Why? Somebody want to tell me why? Do you want to get this guy? Stand up - yeah.Student: Because everyone's going to pick the dominant outcome and then everyone's going to get the worst result - the collectively worst result.Professor Ben Polak: Yeah, that's a possible answer. I'm looking for something more direct here. So we look at the definition of a strictly dominated strategy. I'm saying never play one. What's a possible reason for that? Let's - can we get the woman there?Student: [inaudible]Professor Ben Polak: "You'll always lose." Well, I don't know: it's not about winning and losing. What else could we have? Could we get this guy in the pink down here?Student: Well, the payoffs are lower.Professor Ben Polak: The payoffs are lower, okay. So here's an abbreviated version of that, I mean it's perhaps a little bit longer. The reason I don't want to play a strictly dominated strategy is, if instead, I play the strategy that dominates it, I do better in every case. The reason I never want to play a strictly dominated strategy is, if instead I play the strategy that dominates it, whatever anyone else does I'm doing better than I would have done. Now that's a pretty convincing argument. That sounds like a convincing argument. It sounds like too obvious even to be worth stating in class, so let me now try and shake your faith a little bit in this answer.。

耶鲁大学公开课博弈论笔记 博弈论 讲

耶鲁大学公开课博弈论笔记 博弈论 讲

博弈论作业(博弈论24讲)数应专业一、1、理性人:指代这一类人,他们只关心自己的利益。

2、如果选择a的结果严格优于b,那么就说a相对于b来说是一个严格优势策略。

结论:不要选择严格略施策略。

3、理性人的理性选择造成了次优的结果4、举例:囚徒困境、宿舍卫生打扫问题、企业打价格战等5、协和谬误收益很重要,“如欲得之,必先知之”6、要学会换位思考,站在别人的立场上看别人会怎么做,在考虑自己受益的同时,要注意别人会怎么选择二、1、打渔问题、全球气候变暖与碳排放问题2、博弈的要素:参与人、策略集合、收益3、如果策略a严格劣于策略b,那么不管他人怎么选择,b总是更好的选择4、军队的入侵与防卫问题5、所有人都从1到100中选个数字,最接近所有人选的数字的均值的2/3者为胜,这个数字是多少呢?作为理性人,每个人都会选择67(100*2/3)以下的数,进一步假设你的对手也是理性的,你会选择45(100*4/9)以下的数……依据哲学观点,如果大家都是理性程度相当的,那么最后数字将为1,然而结果却是9,这说明博弈的复杂性6、共同知识与相互知识的区别三、1、利用迭代剔除法领悟中间选民问题2、迭代剔除法就是严格下策反复消去法,不断地把劣势策略剔除出去,最后只剩下相对优势的策略3、中间选民问题就是,在两党制中,政党表述施政纲领要吸引位于中间位置的选民,他们认为在选举中处于中间标度可以吸引左右两边的选民,并以此获得胜利。

4、中间选民问题理论成立的条件是有两个参与人;政治立场能使选民相信。

5、由此延伸出来的还有加油站选址问题,两家加油站不是在不同的路口选址,而是在不确定哪个位置较佳的时候会选在同一处,这也是“中间选民定理”的凸显6、在迭代剔除法不能运用时,比如说该博弈中博弈方1和2均没有严格下策,可以用二维坐标系画出选择策略之后的收益分布四、1、罚点球:一个经过模型简化的点球模型:罚球者可以选择左路,中路,右路3种路线去踢点球,门将可以选择向左扑救或者向右扑救(门将没有傻站着不动的option)。

耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论笔记

耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论笔记

耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论笔记博弈论,是一门研究决策者之间互动行为的学科,它在经济学、政治学、社会学等多个领域发挥着重要作用。

耶鲁大学开放课程中的博弈论课程为我们提供了深入理解和掌握博弈论的机会。

在本篇文章中,我将分享我在学习耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论时所做的笔记和心得体会。

一、博弈论的基本概念和原理1.1 构成博弈论的基本要素博弈论研究的基本要素包括玩家、策略和支付。

玩家是博弈中的决策者,策略是玩家可选择的行动方案,支付是博弈的结果对玩家所产生的效用。

1.2 纳什均衡纳什均衡是博弈论中最重要的概念之一。

在一个博弈中,若每个参与者选择了一个策略,并且没有一个参与者愿意改变自己的策略,那么这种策略组合就被称为纳什均衡。

纳什均衡是一个非合作博弈中的稳定状态。

1.3 合作博弈与非合作博弈博弈论可分为合作博弈和非合作博弈两大类。

合作博弈强调玩家之间的合作与协调,而非合作博弈中玩家之间是相互独立的,没有直接的合作关系。

二、博弈论的应用领域2.1 经济学中的博弈论应用在经济学中,博弈论被广泛应用于市场竞争、拍卖、企业策略等方面。

通过博弈论的模型和方法,我们能够更好地理解各种经济行为和市场现象,并提供决策方案。

2.2 政治学中的博弈论应用政治学中,博弈论主要应用于研究选举、政策制定等政治行为。

博弈论揭示了政治参与者之间的互动关系和利益博弈,为我们分析政治决策提供了一种新的视角。

2.3 社会学中的博弈论应用博弈论在社会学中的应用主要涉及合作与互助、社会规范等方面。

通过博弈论的分析,我们能够更好地理解人类社会中的合作关系、道德行为和社会规范的形成。

三、耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论学习心得在学习耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论的过程中,我深刻体会到博弈论的重要性和应用广泛性。

通过学习博弈论,我不仅了解了博弈论的基本概念和原理,还学会了运用博弈论的方法分析和解决实际问题。

耶鲁大学开放课程博弈论课程的教学内容十分丰富,通过生动的案例分析和实践操作,课程帮助我更好地理解了博弈论的核心思想和应用方法。

(完整版)耶鲁公开课--博弈论笔记

(完整版)耶鲁公开课--博弈论笔记

耶鲁公开课一博弈论笔记第一节、名词解释优势策略(Dominant strategy ):不论其他局中人采取什么策略,优势策略对一个局中人而言都是最好的策略。

即某些时候它胜于其他策略,且任何时候都不会比其他策略差。

注:1、"优势策略”的优势是指你的这个策略对你的其他策略占有优势,而不是无论对手采用什么策略,都占有优势的策略。

2、采用优势策略得到的最坏的结果不一定比采用另外一个策略得到的最佳的结果略胜一筹。

严格劣势策略(strictly dominated strategy):被全面的严格优势策略压住的那个策略,也就是说不是严格优势策略以外的策略。

弱劣势策略:原来不是严格劣势策略,但是经过剔除严格劣势策略后,这个策略就成了严格劣势策略。

例:囚徒困境甲沉默{合作)甲认罪(背叛乙沉默(合作)二人同服刑半年甲即时获释!乙眼刑F评乙认罪(背扳)甲腮刑10年;乙即时获释二炯服刑2年囚徒到底应该选择哪一项策略,才能将自己个人的刑期缩至最短?两名囚徒由于隔绝监禁,并不知道对方选择;而即使他们能交谈,还是未必能够尽信对方不会反口。

就个人的理性选择而言,检举背叛对方所得刑期,总比沉默要来得低。

试设想困境中两名理性囚徒会如何作出选择:若对方沉默、背叛会让我获释,所以会选择背叛。

若对方背叛指控我,我也要指控对方才能得到较低的刑期,所以也是会选择背叛。

二人面对的情况一样,所以二人的理性思考都会得出相同的结论一一选择背叛。

背叛是两种策略之中的支配性策略。

因此,这场博弈中唯一可能达到的纳什均衡,就是双方参与者都背叛对方,结果二人同样服刑2年。

例:协和谬误20 世纪60 年代,英法两国政府联合投资开发大型超音速客机,即协和飞机。

该种飞机机身大、装饰豪华并且速度快,其开发可以说是一场豪赌,单是设计一个新引擎的成本就可能高达数亿元。

难怪政府也会被牵涉进去,竭力要为本国企业提供更大的支持。

项目开展不久,英法两国政府发现:继续投资开发这样的机型,花费会急剧增加,但这样的设计定位能否适应市场还不知道;但是停止研制也是可怕的,因为以前的投资将付诸东流。

(完整版)耶鲁大学公开课博弈论原版资料

(完整版)耶鲁大学公开课博弈论原版资料

Syllabusby (course_default) — last modified 10-14-2008 04:00 PMDocument Actions•This course is an introduction to game theory and strategic thinking. Ideas such as dominance, backward induction, Nash equilibrium, evolutionary stability, commitment, credibility, asymmetric information, adverse selection, and signaling are discussed and applied to games played in class and to examples drawn from economics, politics, the movies, and elsewhere.ECON 159: Game Theory (Fall, 2007)SyllabusProfessor:Ben Polak, Professor of Economics and Management, Yale University Description:This course is an introduction to game theory and strategic thinking. Ideas such as dominance, backward induction, Nash equilibrium, evolutionary stability, commitment, credibility, asymmetric information, adverse selection, and signaling are discussed and applied to games played in class and to examples drawn from economics, politics, the movies, and elsewhere.Texts:A. Dixit andB. Nalebuff. Thinking Strategically, Norton 1991J. Watson. Strategy: An Introduction to Game Theory, Norton 2002P.K. Dutta. Strategies and Games: Theory And Practice, MIT 1999 Requirements:Who should take this course?This course is an introduction to game theory. Introductory microeconomics (115 or equivalent) is required. Intermediate micro (150/2)is not required, but it is recommended. We will use calculus (mostly one variable) in this course. We will also refer to ideas like probability and expectation. Some may prefer to take the course next academic year once they have more background. Students who have already taken Econ 156b should not enroll in this class.Course Aims and Methods.Game theory is a way of thinking about strategic situations. One aim of the course is to teach you some strategic considerations to take into account making your choices. A second aim is to predict how other people or organizations behave when they are in strategic settings. We will see that these aims are closely related. We will learn new concepts, methods and terminology. A third aim is to apply these tools to settings from economics and from elsewhere. The course will emphasize examples. We will also play several games in class.Outline and Reading.Most of the reading for this course comes from the first ten chapters of Dutta or from the first two parts of Watson. There will be a reading packet for weeks 6-7. The readings are not compulsory, but they will help back up the class material.Grading:Problem sets: 30%Midterm examination: 30%Final examination: 40%Transcript 1 - Introduction: five first lessonsby mvd4 — last modified 09-15-2011 09:34 AMDocument Actions•We introduce Game Theory by playing a game. We organize the game into players, their strategies, and their goals or payoffs; and we learn that we should decide what our goals are before we make choices. With some plausible payoffs, our game is a prisoners' dilemma. We learn that we should never choose a dominated strategy; but that rational play by rational players can lead to bad outcomes. We discuss some prisoners' dilemmas in the real world and some possible real-world remedies. With other plausible payoffs, our game is a coordination problem and has very different outcomes: so different payoffs matter. We often need to think, not only about our own payoffs, but also others' payoffs. We should put ourselves in others' shoes and try to predict what they will do. This is the essence of strategic thinking.Game Theory: Lecture 1 TranscriptSeptember 5, 2007 << backChapter 1. What Is Strategy? [00:00:00]Professor Ben Polak:So this is Game Theory Economics 159. If you're here for art history, you're either in the wrong room or stay anyway, maybe this is the right room; but this is Game Theory, okay. You should have four handouts; everyone should have four handouts. There is a legal release form--we'll talk about it in a minute--about the videoing. There is a syllabus, which is a preliminary syllabus: it's also online. And there are two games labeled Game 1 and Game 2. Can I get you all to look at Game 1 and start thinking about it. And while you're thinking about it, I am hoping you can multitask a bit. I'll describe a bit about the class and we'll get a bit of admin under our belts. But please try and lookat--somebody's not looking at it, because they're using it as a fan here--so look at Game 1 and fill out that form for me, okay?So while you're filling that out, let me tell you a little bit about what we're going to be doing here. So what is Game Theory? Game Theory is a。

(完整word)耶鲁大学博弈论_精简版

(完整word)耶鲁大学博弈论_精简版

第一讲导论—五个入门结论1。

通过成绩博弈模型可以知道,不选择严格劣势策略,因为每次博弈会得到更好的收益.2。

通过囚徒的困境博弈模型可以知道,理性选择导致次优的结果(协商难以达成目的的原因不是因为缺少沟通,而是没有强制力)。

3。

通过愤怒天使博弈模型可以知道,汝欲得之,必先知之;永远选择优势策略,选择非劣势策略,损失小,如果对手有优势策略则应以此作为选择策略的指导.4.如果想要赢,就应该站在别人的立场去分析他们会怎么做.第二讲学会换位思考1.构成博弈要素包括,参与人,参与人的策略以及收益.2。

所谓严格优势策略,就是指不论对方采取什么策略,采取的这个策略总比采取其他任何策略都好的策略。

3。

在博弈中剔出某些选择时需要站在别人的角度去思考结果,因为对手不会选择劣势策略;同时要考虑到对手也是一个理性的参与人。

4.在博弈中剔除某些选择是一种直接思考,同时也是作为一个理性参与人的选择。

第三讲迭代剔除和中位选民定理1。

在选民投票博弈模型中,通过不断地迭代以及剔除来决定策略,由此,我们得到了一种新的选择策略的方法:迭代剔除法。

2.选民投票博弈模型的结果与现实存在偏差,主要是因为:现实中选民并不是均匀分布的;选民通常根据候选人的性格而非政治立场来进行投票,而政治立场只是单一维度;只适用于只有两个候选人的情况;④同时存在弃权票;⑤选民未必相信候选人所声明的立场。

3.建立模型,是为了更好的描述事实以激发灵感,模型是有重要的事是抽象而来,逐步增加约束条件完善模型观察结果,比较分析结果的变化。

第四节足球比赛与商业合作之最佳对策1。

点球博弈模型告诉我们,不要选择一个在任何情况或信念下都不是最佳对策的策略。

2.最佳对策:参与人针对对手策略的定义:参与人i的策略s^i(简写成BR)是对手策略S—i的最佳对策,如果参与人i在对手的策略S-i下选S^i的收益弱优于其它对策Si`,这对参与人i的所有Si`都适用,则策略S^i是其它参与人策略S—i的最佳对策。

博弈论

博弈论

教授就此提到美国总统选举(这个问题本身就是通过政治家选举提出的嘛),尼克松,肯尼迪以及克林顿成功当选总统时演讲的政治立场,都是那种比较中立的,既不保守也不激进(可以把极端保守看作1,把极端激进看作10),从而拉拢中间选民。
经济学领域,这称之为“产品植入”。 /*手有点疼,今天暂时到这,这是注释*/。表现为商家分布普遍集中以争取附近的客源。
好了,来点正经的。
博弈的要素:参与者(player,i,j),策略(strategy,si),策略集(strategy set),策略组合(strategy profile),获益(payoff)
提到了侵略者与防守者之间的关系,这个《博弈游戏》上也有讲过,比如汉尼拔将军翻过阿尔卑斯山,两条路走哪一条。引入部分优势策略:某一策略的获益至少大于等于其他策略,并且至少在一种策略中的获益大于其他策略。
以政治家选举的形式给出了“中位数选民定理”,课堂上的描述很繁琐,我用自己的语言描述一下,其实就是一个数字问题:博弈的两个人各自选择从1到10之间的一个数A和B,用数字相差的单位来表示距离。距离离A近的属于A范围,离B近的属于B范围,与A和B距离相等的数字属于中立,将被平分给A和B。最后谁的范围更大谁获胜。比如A为1,B为2,那么A的范围就是从1到1.5,B的范围是从1.5到10.所以B获胜,也就是选择2的人为数不少的人选择了32,33,34.理由是大家都在1-100之间随机选的话,平均数应该是50,所以平均数的三分之二就是33.但是这种想法的错误之处大家不是随机选择,并且显然不会有人选择比100的三分之二,也就是比66还大的数。所以67到100之间的选择可以直接被剔除。那么既然67不会有人选,大于44,45的数也可以完全被剔除.(平均数不可能超过67,所以其三分之二也不可能超过45,45到67之间的数在原博弈中并不是劣势策略的数,但是去掉67以上这些数之后就是劣势策略了)。所以综上所述,如果大家都是理性的话,不会有人选择超过45的数。那45的三分之二是30,所以30到45之间的数,它们在原博弈里不是劣势策略,即使去掉一次劣势策略也不是劣势策略,但是去掉2次的话就是了。再同理,30的三分之二是20,所以20到30之间的数也。。就这样一直下去,最后会一直到1,这样可能么?

耶鲁大学公开课博弈论观后感

耶鲁大学公开课博弈论观后感

耶鲁大学公开课博弈论观后感《耶鲁大学公开课博弈论观后感》耶鲁大学公开课是一门引人入胜的课程,给我们带来了诸多关于博弈论的深刻思考。

博弈论作为一门重要的数学分支,在现代社会中扮演着越来越重要的角色。

通过参与这门公开课,我深刻认识到博弈论的实际应用和其在解决现实问题中的重要性。

下面是我对耶鲁大学公开课博弈论的观后感。

博弈论是由经济学家约翰·冯诺伊曼和数学家奥斯卡·摩根斯坦于20世纪40年代提出的一门数学分支。

博弈论研究的是决策者在不同环境下的最佳策略选择,以及他们之间相互影响的策略关系和收益情况。

通过博弈论,我们可以研究个体在策略选择时面临的困境和冲突,以及如何通过分析对手的策略来制定自己的决策,从而达到最大化自身利益的目标。

在耶鲁大学公开课中,我学到了很多博弈论的基本概念和方法。

课程将博弈论应用到了不同的领域,包括经济学、政治学和生物学等等,展示了博弈论在解决实际问题中的广泛应用。

通过学习这些案例,我深刻认识到博弈论在现代社会中的重要性和必要性。

在博弈论中,最基本的概念之一是“囚徒困境”。

囚徒困境是一种典型的博弈情景,其中两个犯人面临选择合作或背叛的问题。

如果两个犯人都选择合作,则能够达成最好的结果;然而,如果两个犯人都选择背叛,则会导致最坏的结果。

这个案例反映了个体利益和整体利益之间的矛盾,以及自利和合作之间的冲突。

通过分析囚徒困境,我们可以理解为什么在某些情况下,即使两个个体都知道通过合作可以达到更好的结果,但他们仍然选择背叛对方。

除了囚徒困境,课程还介绍了其他一些经典的博弈情景,如“霍布森选房问题”和“拍卖博弈”。

这些案例展示了博弈论在经济决策中的应用。

在霍布森选房问题中,一个房东面临租给两个不同租客的选择。

如果房东选择错了客户,那么他将空置房子并输掉租金收入。

而在拍卖博弈中,各个买家根据自己的估值参与竞价,最终高出其他人的价位的买家将赢得拍卖物品。

这些案例让我深刻认识到个体决策如何受到其他参与者的策略选择的影响,并且如何通过分析和预测其他参与者的行为来制定最佳策略。

博弈论 耶鲁大学公开课 转

博弈论 耶鲁大学公开课 转

博弈论_耶鲁公开课__笔记及扩展1.博弈(game theory)构成要素:参与人players:i,j策略集strategy set:Si 策略si s-i 最优战略si*效益(目标)payoff:Ui Ui(s1,。

si。

sn)博弈game:G={S1,S2....Sn;U1,U2....Un}2.博弈论简史理论提出:1944 冯诺依曼(计算机之父、博弈论之父)与摩根斯坦恩合作出版《博弈论与经济行为》提出了博弈概念;提出了零和博弈(Zero-sum game);引进了合作博弈理论发展:a.奠定非合作博弈基石:1950 Tucker 提出了“囚徒困境”;1950-1951 纳什:引入纳什均衡,将博弈论从零和博弈推进到非零和博弈;定义非合作博弈并证明纳什均衡存在;1994年诺贝尔经济学奖(与selten harsanyi共同拿到)b.1965-1975 泽尔腾Selten 将纳什均衡推广到动态博弈并提出子博弈精炼均衡;发展了倒退归纳分析方法;提出颤抖手均衡c.1967-1968 海萨尼harsanyi将纳什均衡推广到非完全信息博弈并突出贝叶斯均衡3.博弈的分类是否合作合作博弈cooperative ganme 非合作博弈non-operative ganme 一般说博弈指后者后者又分一下四类根据:是否完全信息是否同时进行完全信息静态博弈(囚徒困境prison's dilemma)纳什均衡Nash equilibrium完全信息动态信息(抢劫博弈)子博弈精炼均衡subgame perfect Nash equilibrium非完全信息静态博弈(密封报价拍卖模型)贝叶斯纳什均衡Bayesian Nash equilibrium非完全信息动态博弈(就业市场信号黔驴技穷)精炼贝叶斯纳什均衡perfect Bayesian Nash equilibrium完全信息complete information与完美信息perfect information完全信息指每个参与者都知道其他人的可行策略以及收益(支付函数),如果一个博弈不是完全信息,那么参与者就不可能知道自己的行为对其他博弈者的影响完美信息指参与者对其他参与者行动action的完全知识的状态,并随信息的出现而更新。

耶鲁大学博弈论第一章答案

耶鲁大学博弈论第一章答案
player 3 (b>c>a) b c player 2 (c>a>b) c
a a a a c
Now player 2 has strategy a weakly dominated by c and player 3 has b weakly dominated by c. The predicted outcome is that player 1,2 and 3 will choose strategy a,c and c respectively and finally winner is player candidate c.
Problem Set 1 Solution
Econ 159a/MGT522a, Yale University
M.Chen momotocmx@
1. Strictly and Weakly Dominated Strategies? A strategy si is a strictly dominated strategy if there exists a strategy si such that si always does strictly better than strategy si no matter what others do, that is ui (si , s−i ) > ui (si , s−i ) for all s−i A strategy si is a weakly dominated strategy if there exists a strategy si such that ui (si , s−i ) ≥ ui (si , s−i ) for all s−i ui (si , s−i ) > ui (si , s−i ) for some s−i ExampБайду номын сангаасe:

[耶鲁大学开放课程:博弈论].Problem.Set.4

[耶鲁大学开放课程:博弈论].Problem.Set.4
人2 选择诚实的概率会有怎样的变化?参与人1拒绝更换光头的概率又有怎样的变化?请解释说
明。
(g).有人说 ,在美国当人们生病了去看医生时,他们从来不觉得自己感冒了,而是认为自己是在
“修音响”。请解释一下,为什么人们会认为医生经常欺骗患者不当牟利呢?[提示:可以通过分
析 值对于这个模型的均衡有何影响来入手]
D 5,8 4,2
(a). 找出所有的纳什均衡(包括纯策略纳什均衡和混合策略纳什均衡),并解释说明为何你所找
出的就是所有的纳什均衡。
(b). 假设参与人2的收益 从8减小到6,而其他收益均不变。找出此情况下所有的纳什均衡。
3. 我要修音响(来自Osborne的习题):参与人1的立体音响系统出毛病了,只有一个声道有声。
他不知道需要简单维修 (比如说清理)还是需要彻底维修(比如更换光头)。需要更换光头的概
率为 。在家附近的维修网点里,更换光头的费用是L,而清理的费用是C (其中L>C)。他认识维
修专家-参与人2,参与人2的利润用 表示。她可以选择诚实(收费L为参与人1更换光头或收费C
却在考虑是(y)否(x)要使用他的炸药来制造一次雪崩。博弈的收益如下:
002
x y
a 12,0 0,6
时,001 应该怎么办?
(b). 假如你是耶鲁大学训练出来的 “Queue”先生。作为英国军事情报局的顾问,你会建议001
不要选择哪些路线呢?请说明你的理由。
(c). 热情的观众们现在很想知道这部大片最后的结局是什么样的。请找出一个纳什均衡,使其中
一个参与人采用的是纯策略 而另一个参与人采用的是混合策略 。再找出另外一个纳什均衡使得
其中策略 被赋予概率0。这rse |人人影视博弈论制作小组Darrencui翻译 1

耶鲁大学开放课程:博弈论

耶鲁大学开放课程:博弈论

中文名: 耶鲁大学开放课程:博弈论英文名: Open Yale course:Game Theory版本: 更新完毕[MOV]发行时间: 2009年地区: 美国对白语言: 英语文字语言: 英文简介:课程类型:经济课程介绍:这门课程是系统介绍有关博弈论和战略思想。

比如支配思想、落后的感应、纳什均衡、进化稳定性、承诺,信誉,信息不对称,逆向选择等。

并在课堂上提供了各种游戏以及经济、政治,电影和其他方面的案例来讨论。

关于课程主讲人:Ben Polak教授任职于耶鲁大学管理学院经济系。

他在剑桥大学Trinity College 获得学士学位,在西北大学获得硕士学位,在哈佛大学获得博士学位。

他是微观经济理论和经济史方面的专家。

他的论文在Economic Letters、Journal of Economic Theory、Journal of Economic History、Journal of Legal Studies、Journal of Theoretical and Institutional Economics、Econometrica等学术期刊多次发表。

他最近的研究是“广义功利主义和海萨尼的公正观察员定理”和“平均分散的偏好”课程结构:本耶鲁大学课程每周在学校上两次课,每次75分钟,2007年秋季拍摄作为耶鲁大学开放课程之一。

课程视频截图:课程安排:1 Introduction: five first lessons 简介:五年前的教训2 Putting yourselves into other people's shoes 设身处地为他人着想3 Iterative deletion and the median-voter theorem 迭代删除和位数选民定理4 Best responses in soccer and business partnerships 最佳反应在足球和商业伙伴关系5 Nash equilibrium: bad fashion and bank runs 纳什均衡:坏时尚及银行挤兑6 Nash equilibrium: dating and Cournot 什均衡:约会和诺7 Nash equilibrium: shopping, standing and voting on a line 纳什均衡:购物,并参加表决的常委会上线8 Nash equilibrium: location, segregation and randomization 纳什均衡:定位,隔离和随机9 Mixed strategies in theory and tennis 混合战略的理论和网球10 Mixed strategies in baseball, dating and paying your taxes 混合战略棒球,约会和支付您的税11 Evolutionary stability: cooperation, mutation, and equilibrium 进化稳定:合作,突变,与平衡12 Evolutionary stability: social convention, aggression, and cycles 进化稳定:社会公约,侵略,和周期13 Sequential games: moral hazard, incentives, and hungry lions 顺序游戏:道德风险,奖励和饥饿的狮子14 Backward induction: commitment, spies, and first-mover advantages 落后的感应:承诺,间谍,和先行者优势15 Backward induction: chess, strategies, and credible threats 落后的感应:国际象棋,战略和可信的威胁16 Backward induction: reputation and duels 落后的感应:声誉和决斗17 Backward induction: ultimatums and bargaining 落后的感应:最后通牒和讨价还价18 Imperfect information: information sets and sub-game perfection 不完全信息:信息集和子博弈完美19 Subgame perfect equilibrium: matchmaking and strategic investments 子博弈完美均衡:招商引资和战略投资20 Subgame perfect equilibrium: wars of attrition 子博弈完美均衡:战争的消耗21 Repeated games: cooperation vs. the end game 重复博弈:合作与结局22 Repeated games: cheating, punishment, and outsourcing 重复博弈:作弊,惩罚和外包23 Asymmetric information: silence, signaling and suffering education 信息不对称:沉默,信令和苦难教育24 Asymmetric information: auctions and the winner's curse 信息不对称:拍卖和获奖者的诅咒学校介绍:耶鲁大学(Yale University),旧译“耶劳大书院”,是一所坐落于美国康乃狄格州纽黑文市的私立大学,始创于1701年,初名“大学学院”(Collegiate School)。

博弈论简单支付矩阵课件

博弈论简单支付矩阵课件
理性原则下,他们会写多少价格呢?
(4)、长街上的超市 (海滩占位模型)
0
1/4
A’ 1/2 B’
3/4
1
其它相似情形:旅行社的热门路线;黄金时间的电视节目
(5)狩猎
两个猎人围住一头鹿,各卡住两个关口中的一个,齐心协 力即可成功获得并平分猎物。此时有一群兔子跑过,任何一人去 抓兔子必可成功,但鹿会跑掉。
贡献主要在于通过实验室实验来测试根据经济学理 论而做出预测的未知或不确定性。是对以博弈论为 基础构建的理论模型进行实证证伪工作的一大创举 。
2005:奥曼(Aumann)、谢林(Schelling)
他们通过博弈理论分析增加了世人对合作与冲突的 理解。其理论模型应用在解释社会中不同性质的冲 突、贸易纠纷、价格之争以及寻求长期合作的模式 等经济学和其他社会科学领域。
博弈是一种竞合游戏。
SUCCESS
THANK YOU
2019/9/16
纳什的基本贡献是证明了非合作博弈均 衡解及其存在性,建立了作为博弈论基 础的“纳什均衡”概念;海萨尼则把不 完全信息纳入到博弈论方法体系中;泽 尔腾的贡献在于将博弈论由静态向动态 的扩展,建立了“子博弈精练纳什均衡” 的概念。
1996:莫里斯(James A.Mirrlees)和维克瑞(William Vickrey)
博弈四要素
• 1.博弈要有2个或2个以上的参与者 • 2.博弈要有参与各方争夺的资源或收益 • 3.参与者有自己能够选择的策略 • 4.参与者拥有一定量的信息
2、博弈论的诺贝尔经济学家
约翰·冯·诺依曼 博弈论之父,《博弈论和经济行为》
1994:纳什(Nash)、海萨尼(J.Harsanyi)、泽尔腾(R.Selten)

策略博弈

策略博弈

耶鲁大学博弈论课堂笔记(一)第一节:导论——五个入门结论无论别人怎么选,如果选a的结果严格优于b,那么a相对于b是个严格优势策略。

结论一:不要选择严格劣势策略。

理由:如果我选择了优势策略,我在每次博弈都得到更好的收益。

结论二:理性的选择,使总结果变得糟糕。

(理性人的理性选择造成了次优的结果。

)——囚徒困境结论三:汝欲得之,必先知之。

结论四:站在别人的立场上去分析他们会怎么做。

结论五:耶鲁大学的学生都很自私。

第二节:学会换位思考博弈的要素有哪些?例:III博弈分析:不管i怎么选,中间总是优于右边,得出结论,参与者ii不应该选右。

(参与者i的策略s’i,严格劣于参与者i的另一个策略si,在其他参与者选择s-i时,此情况下选s’i的收益UI(s’i),对所有的s-i均成立。

)表达:s’i严格劣于si, Ui(si,s-i)>Ui(s’i,s-i) for all “s-i”.文字表述:如果si总是更好的选择,即总能给参与人i带来更高的收益,而无论其他参与人怎么选。

例:防线布置问题入侵者打算入侵一个国家,有两条路,必须通过其一才能进入,你是这个国家的防御者,要决定在哪个路口布置防线,只能防守二者之一。

一条路崎岖(途中会损失一个营的兵力),另一条路平坦,如果入侵者遇到了你布置的防线,不管哪条路都要再损失一个营的兵力入侵者收益为攻入国家时还剩多少兵力,防守者的收益为入侵者损失多少兵力。

分析:如果入侵者走eazy pass,你应防守 eazy pass(优于hard pass);如果入侵者走hard pass,你应防守hard pass(优于eazy pass)结论:入侵者不会采取“弱劣势策略”崎岖之路是弱劣势策略,应在平坦之路设防。

(弱劣势策略)(参与者的策略s’i弱劣于其他策略si当且仅当在对手选s-i的情况下,参与人i选择si的收益等于对手选s-i下她选s’i的收益。

而且在任何情况下此条件均成立)表达:s’i弱劣于其他策略si ,Ui(si,s-i) >=Ui(s’i,s-i)耶鲁大学博弈论课堂笔记(二)第三节:迭代剔除和中位选民定理『迭代剔除』:例:政治模型案例假设有两个候选人,他们为了选举必须确定自己的政治立场,他们要从一系列政治主张中选择一个政治立场。

耶鲁博弈论24讲全笔记

耶鲁博弈论24讲全笔记

耶鲁博弈论24讲全笔记第一部分:博弈论的基础知识1、博弈论的定义及其在现实生活中的应用《耶鲁博弈论24讲全笔记》“1、博弈论的定义及其在现实生活中的应用”博弈论,这个引人入胜的学科,是一门研究决策问题的独特学科。

它的基本思想在于,把复杂多变的真实世界简化为具有明确规则和目标的多人决策问题。

在这个世界里,每一个参与者都需要根据其他参与者的策略来调整自己的决策,以期达到各自的目标。

博弈论起源于棋类游戏,如国际象棋和围棋,这些游戏的规则明确,且每个玩家都有可能成为赢家或输家。

然而,博弈论的应用远不止于此。

在现实世界中,博弈论的原理被广泛应用于政治、经济、生物、国际关系等多个领域。

在政治领域,博弈论可以帮助我们理解权力平衡和国际关系。

例如,囚徒困境就是一个经典的博弈论模型,它描述了两个囚犯因共同犯罪而受审的情况。

在这个情境中,两个囚犯都需要做出决策,是否选择揭发对方。

这个模型不仅可以解释为什么有时候合作会带来更大的利益,也可以揭示为什么有时候,即使个人利益最大化的选择也会导致集体的非最优结果。

在经济领域,博弈论更是具有广泛的应用。

例如,拍卖中的博弈论可以帮助我们理解为什么拍卖可以带来高昂的成交价,以及为什么有时候最低价拍卖可以带来最大的社会利益。

此外,博弈论还可以帮助我们理解市场垄断、价格竞争等复杂的市场行为。

在生物学领域,博弈论被用来解释生物种群的进化策略,如猎物的捕食者与被捕食者之间的动态关系。

在医学领域,博弈论也被用来理解和预测疾病的发展和传播。

总的来说,博弈论是一种独特的思考方式,它可以帮助我们理解真实世界中的决策和策略行为。

它的应用广泛,无论是在政治、经济、生物还是其他领域,都可以找到博弈论的应用实例。

通过学习博弈论,我们可以更好地理解真实世界中的决策过程,并找到更优的决策策略。

2、博弈的参与者、策略和结果《耶鲁博弈论24讲全笔记》是一本介绍博弈论的经典教材,第二讲“博弈的参与者、策略和结果”是其中的重要部分。

(完整word版)耶鲁大学公开课博弈论原版资料

(完整word版)耶鲁大学公开课博弈论原版资料

Syllabusby (course_default) — last modified 10—14-2008 04:00 PMDocument Actions•This course is an introduction to game theory and strategic thinking. Ideas such as dominance, backward induction, Nash equilibrium, evolutionary stability,commitment, credibility, asymmetric information, adverse selection, and signaling are discussed and applied to games played in class and to examples drawn from economics,politics, the movies, and elsewhere.ECON 159: Game Theory (Fall, 2007)SyllabusProfessor:Ben Polak, Professor of Economics and Management, Yale UniversityDescription:This course is an introduction to game theory and strategic thinking. Ideas such as dominance, backward induction, Nash equilibrium, evolutionary stability, commitment,credibility, asymmetric information, adverse selection, and signaling are discussed and applied to games played in class and to examples drawn from economics, politics, the movies, and elsewhere.Texts:A。

耶鲁大学博弈论

耶鲁大学博弈论

耶鲁大学博弈论
耶鲁大学博弈论经过几十年的发展,已经深刻改变了我们对知识和智力的观念。

耶鲁大学博弈论是一种游戏理论,旨在实现最大化知识和智慧发挥的有效性,帮助人们理解各种游戏中双方玩家最佳选择策略。

该理论可以追溯到二十世纪六七十年代,由知名的游戏理论学家约翰·亚当斯
发展而来。

耶鲁大学博弈论的理论框架在1976年发表于美国经济学会的博弈论文中,提出了游戏变量,是闭环型博弈理论的主要原型。

耶鲁大学博弈论的精神被推展进学术界,用以研究如何在博弈结构中最有效地
利用知识和智力。

理论课程涵盖全球范围内的市场、协调绩效和反腐抉择,旨在培养学生对“博弈论”最佳选择策略的理解能力。

耶鲁大学博弈论的研究也被采用到其他学科领域,例如政治学、社会学和国际
关系学等,旨在给出生物学,艺术学和社会解释结构有效的玩法模式。

耶鲁大学博弈论的理论被广泛研究,成功促进了多学科的交叉研究,不仅拓宽了学术领域,还深入探讨了人类智慧的本源。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

第一讲导论-五个入门结论1.通过成绩博弈模型可以知道,不选择严格劣势策略,因为每次博弈会得到更好的收益。

2.通过囚徒的困境博弈模型可以知道,理性选择导致次优的结果(协商难以达成目的的原因不是因为缺少沟通,而是没有强制力)。

3.通过愤怒天使博弈模型可以知道,汝欲得之,必先知之;永远选择优势策略,选择非劣势策略,损失小,如果对手有优势策略则应以此作为选择策略的指导。

4.如果想要赢,就应该站在别人的立场去分析他们会怎么做。

第二讲学会换位思考1.构成博弈要素包括,参与人,参与人的策略以及收益。

2.所谓严格优势策略,就是指不论对方采取什么策略,采取的这个策略总比采取其他任何策略都好的策略。

3.在博弈中剔出某些选择时需要站在别人的角度去思考结果,因为对手不会选择劣势策略;同时要考虑到对手也是一个理性的参与人。

4.在博弈中剔除某些选择是一种直接思考,同时也是作为一个理性参与人的选择。

第三讲迭代剔除和中位选民定理1.在选民投票博弈模型中,通过不断地迭代以及剔除来决定策略,由此,我们得到了一种新的选择策略的方法:迭代剔除法。

2.选民投票博弈模型的结果与现实存在偏差,主要是因为:①现实中选民并不是均匀分布的;②选民通常根据候选人的性格而非政治立场来进行投票,而政治立场只是单一维度;③只适用于只有两个候选人的情况;④同时存在弃权票;⑤选民未必相信候选人所声明的立场。

3.建立模型,是为了更好的描述事实以激发灵感,模型是有重要的事是抽象而来,逐步增加约束条件完善模型观察结果,比较分析结果的变化。

第四节足球比赛与商业合作之最佳对策1.点球博弈模型告诉我们,不要选择一个在任何情况或信念下都不是最佳对策的策略。

2.最佳对策:①参与人针对对手策略的定义:参与人i的策略s^i(简写成BR)是对手策略S-i的最佳对策,如果参与人i在对手的策略S-i下选S^i的收益弱优于其它对策Si`,这对参与人i的所有Si`都适用,则策略S^i是其它参与人策略S-i的最佳对策。

S^i最大化了对手选S-i时我的收益;②最佳对策广义定义:参与人i的策略S^i是最佳策略(你对其他参与人可能采取的策略持信念P时的最佳策略),在参与人i仍持信念P的情况下选S^i 的获得预期收益比在同样的信念P下选其它的策略获得的预期收益都要高(对于所有可选的Si`均成立)即Eu(S^i,P)≥Eu(Si`,P) Si` in Si 我从Si选择可选策略时S^i而非S-i最大化了我的预期收益。

第五讲坏风气与银行挤兑1.纳什均衡,即对任意一个此博弈内的参与者A,他所选择的策略是其他参与人所选策略的最佳策略。

2.学习纳什均衡,是为了过后不为当时的决定后悔,因为选择的最佳策略。

3.当纳什均衡存在,任何参与人严格不会改变策略,改变策略严格不会使参与人的收益增加;其他参与人不改变行为的前提下,自己改变策略不会得到任何好处(即博弈会朝着趋向于一个均衡的方向自然发展,结果不断趋向一个纳什均衡)。

第六讲 约会游戏与古诺模型1.在古诺模型中,参与人只有两位,他们有很多连续可选策略。

假设两家公司生产同质的产品,介于完全竞争和垄断之间。

博弈的纳什均衡是基于两家都想利益最大化。

因为两个参与人都追求利润最大化,所达到的纳什均衡并不能使整个行业的总利润最大化,只有达到垄断竞争的产量才能使整个行业的利润达到最大化。

2.在古诺均衡下,事情很自然的处于两种极端情况之间,即行业产量在某种程度上是介于在垄断和完全竞争两种情况之间,它比在垄断情况下产量高,比在完全竞争下产量低;行业价格是分布在两者之间,即比垄断下价格低,比完全竞争下价格高;行业利润分布在两者之间,即比垄断下利润少,比完全竞争下利润高。

第七讲 伯川德模型与选民投票1.古诺模型是产量上的竞争,伯川德模型是在价格上的竞争。

2.伯川德模型,即生产相同产品的公司定价的博弈模型。

它只有一个纳什均衡,因为两家公司的最佳策略都是把他们的价格设定在边际成本。

问题的重点是这个公司进行价格竞争的博弈,尽管博弈中只有两个公司,我们发现这个市场下的价格等于边际成本,均衡下的利润为0,并有很多消费者剩余,这个结果与完全竞争非常相似。

3.通过伯川德模型我们可以知道,不同的策略集合设定会得到一个完全不同的结果。

4.在候选人选民模型中,假设选民在线上平均分布,选票的获得与选民投票博弈一致,区别在于该模型候选人的数量不固定;候选人不能选择他们的立场。

第八讲 立场选择、种族隔离和策略随机化1.通过分析候选人博弈模型,我们可以得出三个结论:①这个模型中可能存在多个纳什均衡,且并非所有的纳什均衡中候选人都保持中间立场;②如果左派有一个新的候选人加入,可能会导致右派获胜的概率增大,反之亦然;③如果候选人太极端,就会优先的中间候选人参选。

2.通过选址博弈模型,我们可以知道:①看上去没有意义的博弈规则,又是是很重要的条件;②社会随机分配,其结果要比所谓的自主选择要好。

3.在猜拳游戏中,31的混合策略是应对31混合策略的最佳策略,且是唯一一个纳什均衡。

第九讲 混合策略及其在网球比赛中的应用1.混合策略的预期收益等于它所包含的每个纯策略预期收益的加权平均数。

2.混合策略的预期收益介于它所包含的纯策略的预期收益的最大值和最小值之间。

所以说,如果一个混合策略是最佳策略,则它所包含的每个纯策略都是最佳策略,且它们的预期收益必须相同。

3.如果混合策略中的某个纯策略被赋予正概率,则该策略本身是一个最佳策略(寻找混合策略纳什均衡的捷径)。

4.通过网球比赛的案例可以知道,如果参与人的某个混合策略是纳什均衡的一部分,那么该混合策略中的纯策略,本身一定也是最佳策略。

5.战略影响大于直接影响,即博弈策略的选择的影响力大于个人能力的提升的影响力。

第十讲混合策略与棒球、约会和纳税1.证明最佳策略的方法:不存在严格优于纳什均衡策略的纯策略;混合策略师纯策略的加权平均数;只需考虑改选纯策略是否严格有利即可。

2.关于情侣约会问题。

最后得到的纳什均衡策略偏低,并不意味着模型建立失败,而是因为实际上有其他方面因素的影响,比如约会双方会适当的考虑对方的想法和感受,所以在种种外界条件的影响下,得到的纳什均衡就是最佳策略。

3.关于纳税问题。

当想要提高纳税人真实纳税的概率时,如果选择加大惩处力度的方式,则纳税人在这场博弈中的预期收益没有改变,不会达到提高真实纳税的概率,而且这样的做法会降低税务审计人员的审查力度,从而使得事态向着与预期相反的方向发展。

正确的做法应该是设法提高纳税人虚假纳税后的收益,才能够达到预期的效果。

另外在现实生活中,税务审计人员根据实际情况,会更多的审查富人的纳税情况。

第十一讲合作、突变与平衡1.博弈论对生物学有重大影响,特别是动物行为(在生物进化过程中,基因就相当于博弈中的策略,遗传适应性则相当于收益;策略是天生的)。

2.博弈论对社会科学有重大影响。

3.通过蚂蚁的合作与背叛模型判断合作是否为稳定进化的策略。

可以得出两个结论:①自然选择的进化结果是坏的,即非合作者会生存下来(显然这个结论是错的,原因就在于,在现实的生物进化过程中,有性繁殖会导致基因重组,合作基因将入侵非合作基因并渐渐占据主位);②如果策略是严格劣势策略,则它不是进化稳定策略(这个结论是对的,严格优势策略才会获胜)。

4.如果策略不是纳什均衡策略,则存在其他有利变动的策略;如果策略是进化稳定策略,则该策略是纳什均衡策略,反之不成立。

第十二讲社会公约、侵略和周期1.靠左行车还是靠右行车的博弈模型是一个协同博弈。

我们可以从中看出:①可以存在多种进化稳定的社会传统,这种传统没有绝对的高效率,这些习惯也没有必要一样好;②进化稳定性不意味着高效率。

2.关于两性战争的博弈。

该博弈里没有对称的纯策略那是博弈均衡,有一个对称的混合策略的纳什均衡。

3.通过鹰-鸽之战的博弈模型,我们可以知道:在自然界中,如果战胜的获利比代价大,那么在争夺中就会产生稳定进化,即动物的斗争性会形成进化稳定;如果战胜的代价比获利大,也不会形成百分百的顺从性。

因此不可能不存在斗争,也不存在百分百的斗争。

对于同一物种而言,奖励渐渐增大,斗争性就会增加;代价渐渐增大,顺从性就会增大。

但二者绝不会消失。

第十三讲道德风险、奖励和担保1.贯序博弈,即参与人B在确定自己的决策之前,可以知道参与人i的行为,而参与人i 也知晓这样的情况的博弈。

2.在借贷博弈当中,道德风险不仅仅对于借方的决策有约束力,对于贷方也有一定的不利。

所以在实际操作中,借贷双方通常会通过限制项目的规模,来减小自己上当受骗的风险。

3.在借贷博弈中,双方会在合同中设计激励性条款,来使得对方能够最大可能的按照自己预期收益的方向发展。

它对于双方的决策均有约束,在整个博弈过程中意义重大。

4.担保是承诺策略的一种,其关键在于一定要让对方知晓;其意义在于可以通过减少可选策略的方法达到改变其他人的行为的目的。

第十四讲承诺、间谍与先行者优势1.在古诺模型里,两个最佳策略曲线的交点,就是纳什均衡点。

2.将古诺模型里的同时博弈变成贯序博弈,就得到了斯塔克伯格模型。

在这个新的模型里,先行者必占优势。

可以通过逆向归纳法来解决斯塔克伯格模型的问题。

3.为了使先行的行为变得可信,先行者必须给出承诺。

4.沉没成本需要对方做出一个承诺。

5.间谍问题的关键在于,对方知道你想要或已经知道更多的信息,但这时的大量信息中含有虚假信息,反倒影响决策。

真的心意意味着它能领先于其他竞争对手先行动。

6.先行在绝大多数情况下占优势,但不是所有的情况。

第十五讲国际象棋、战略和可信的威胁1.完全信息博弈,即在博弈中的任意节点上,被轮到的参与者都知道自己在整个博弈中的哪个节点的博弈。

也就是说,在一个完全信息博弈里,参与人的纯策略是一个完整的行动计划,即这个纯策略明确了他将要采取怎样的行动。

2.利用逆向归纳法可以找到完全信息博弈里的纳什均衡。

3.对于市场,在公开决定进入但还没有进入时,会受到市场在位者的威胁,但这些威胁不是可信威胁,因为当你真正进入市场时,你会发现他们并不会那么做。

第十六讲声誉和决斗1.优势理论。

①当还没有人投掷出湿海绵,参与人i如果可以确定j在某一点不会投掷,那么他就会选择在进一步,即i在这一点也不会投掷;②如果参与人i在d点知道参与人j 在d-1点会投掷湿海绵,则他会选择投掷湿海绵。

2.正在进行的一轮中的命中率要大于对手后一轮中的失误率,这样比较的原因是本轮比赛中获胜的概率是击中对手的概率,在下一轮开始前获胜的概率取决于下一轮对手失误的概率。

3.有时候等待是一个好策略。

第十七讲最后通牒和讨价还价1.通过轮流提议的议价过程案例可以知道,在特殊条件下,会得到平均的分配,也会得到均等的利益份额,但是需要满足3个条件:①可能会出现无数次议价,议价会一直持续下去;②折损并不是很大,它表示条件会很快给出(也就是说没有折损,或者说在快速报价);③如果假定两个人都是一样的不耐烦,则他们有相同的折损原因。

相关文档
最新文档