Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Extensive form representation of a two proposal ultimatum game. Player 1 can offer a fair (F) or unfair (U) proposal; player 2 can accept (A) or reject (R). The ultimatum game is a popular experimental economics game in which two players interact to decide how to divide a sum of money, first described by Nobel laureate John Harsanyi in 1961. [1]
Strategic excess capacity may be established to either reduce the viability of entry for potential firms. [5] Excess capacity take place when an incumbent firm threatens to entrants of the possibility to increase their production output and establish an excess of supply, and then reduce the price to a level where the competing cannot contend.
In game theory, an extensive-form game is a specification of a game allowing for the explicit representation of a number of key aspects, like the sequencing of players' possible moves, their choices at every decision point, the (possibly imperfect) information each player has about the other player's moves when they make a decision, and their payoffs for all possible game outcomes.
A limit order will not shift the market the way a market order might. The downsides to limit orders can be relatively modest: You may have to wait and wait for your price.
[13] A monopoly possesses a substantial amount of market power, however, it is not unlimited. A monopoly is a price maker, not a price taker, meaning that a monopoly has the power to set the market price. [14] The firm in monopoly is the market as it sets its price based on their circumstances of what best suits them.
A payoff function for a player is a mapping from the cross-product of players' strategy spaces to that player's set of payoffs (normally the set of real numbers, where the number represents a cardinal or ordinal utility—often cardinal in the normal-form representation) of a player, i.e. the payoff function of a player takes as its input a ...
Then, the game is not necessarily zero-sum - it is possible that both players will win. In fact, whenever Breaker has a winning strategy in the Maker-Breaker game, it is possible that two Breakers will both win in the Breaker-Breaker game. An application of this strategy is an efficient algorithm for coloring a hypergraph.
Any threat by the follower claiming that it will not observe even if it can is as uncredible as those above. This is an example of too much information hurting a player. In Cournot competition, it is the simultaneity of the game (the imperfection of knowledge) that results in neither player (ceteris paribus) being at a disadvantage.