- 47
- 105 176
Naomi Utgoff
United States
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 12 พ.ค. 2020
Advanced Microeconomic Theory 1.1: Deferred Acceptance in a Marriage Problem
In this video, we execute Gale and Shapley's deferred acceptance algorithm in a marriage problem. Please leave your questions in the comments.
มุมมอง: 1 169
วีดีโอ
Advanced Microeconomic Theory 0.3: Reading A Paper
มุมมอง 5724 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, I read and discuss cold(-ish) Irving's "An Efficient Algorithm For The Stable Roommates Problem" with my annotations and a discussion of thought process. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Advanced Microeconomic Theory 0.2: How To Read A Paper
มุมมอง 5404 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we discuss how to read an economic theory paper.
Advanced Microeconomic Theory 0.1: What Is Matching?
มุมมอง 3924 ปีที่แล้ว
Papers we will read (time and class evolution permitting): 1. (Definite) Gale, David, and Lloyd S. Shapley. ``College admissions and the stability of marriage.'' The American Mathematical Monthly 69, no. 1 (1962): 9-15. 2. (Definite) Roth, Alvin E. ``On the allocation of residents to rural hospitals: a general property of two-sided matching markets.'' Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric So...
Game Theory 43 : The 1st Price Sealed Bid Auction
มุมมอง 3.5K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we introduce the first price sealed bid auction and find its Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 42: The 2nd Price Sealed Bid (Vickrey) Auction
มุมมอง 2.7K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we introduce the second price sealed bid auction for a single good, find its Nash equilibrium, and compare it to the ascending clock auction. Please leave your questions in the comments. Ausubel and Milgrom's "The Lovely But Lonely Vickrey Auction" for a great discussion of why the Vickrey auction is a great benchmark but problematic in practice: www.ausubel.com/auction-papers/lo...
Game Theory 41: The Ascending Clock Auction
มุมมอง 6064 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we introduce the ascending clock auction and discuss its implementation via the Japanese (button) auction and several related formats. Then we find the equilibrium bidding strategy in the ascending clock auction. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 40: Why Auction Things?
มุมมอง 1794 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we discuss some reasons that buying and selling via an auction is an attractive market design choice. Please leave your questions in the comments. Cattle Auction: th-cam.com/video/Ea7gn8hhEFA/w-d-xo.html Modigliani Auction: th-cam.com/video/v5mBevmrd7I/w-d-xo.html
Game Theory 39: Vaccination With Incomplete Information
มุมมอง 4134 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video we use a vaccination game with incomplete information to demonstrate how to find a Bayesian Nash equilibrium in a game with discrete action spaces and continuous type spaces. Please leave your questions in the comments. For further information: www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/onesimus-smallpox-boston-cotton-mather The link contains a brief history of smallpox variolation (t...
Game Theory 38: Cournot Duopoly With 1-Sided Incomplete Information
มุมมอง 2.7K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we find the Bayesian Nash equilbrium of Cournot duopoly with 1-sided incomplete information by direct expected utility maximization. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 37: Static Games of Incomplete Information
มุมมอง 1.8K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video we define static games of incomplete information, discuss types and information, and define strategies and Bayesian Nash equilibrium. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 36: Information, Timing, Beliefs, and Bayesian Updating
มุมมอง 8634 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video we give an example of a incomplete information decision problem, and demonstrate how a player's type is revealed by her actions. (With a special guest star!) Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 33: Rubinstein's Bargaining Game
มุมมอง 2.6K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we use stationarity to find the unique subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of Rubinstein's alternating offer bargaining game. Please leave your questions in the comment.
Game Theory 32: Finite Horizon Bargaining
มุมมอง 2.3K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we introduce the ultimatum game, and use it to construct a two round (finite horizon) bargaining game. The ultimatum game is the building block of Rubinstein's infinite horizon alternating offer bargaining game, which we study in the next video. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 35: The Folk Theorem
มุมมอง 1.3K4 ปีที่แล้ว
In this video, we state the folk theorem and give some examples of how to use it. Please leave your questions in the comments.
Game Theory 29: Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium as a refinement of (plain, old) Nash Equilibrium
มุมมอง 2.1K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 29: Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium as a refinement of (plain, old) Nash Equilibrium
Game Theory 28: Subgames, Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium, and Backwards Induction
มุมมอง 11K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 28: Subgames, Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibrium, and Backwards Induction
Game Theory 27: Selten's Chain Store Paradox and Credibility
มุมมอง 3.5K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 27: Selten's Chain Store Paradox and Credibility
Game Theory 26: Actions, Strategies, and the Path of Play
มุมมอง 1.4K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 26: Actions, Strategies, and the Path of Play
Game Theory 25: The Extensive Form and Game Tree of a Dynamic Game of Complete Information
มุมมอง 3.5K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 25: The Extensive Form and Game Tree of a Dynamic Game of Complete Information
Game Theory 23: Population Games and Vaccination
มุมมอง 5364 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 23: Population Games and Vaccination
Game Theory 22: The Nash Existence Theorem
มุมมอง 3.2K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 22: The Nash Existence Theorem
Game Theory 21: Bertrand Duopoly with Asymmetric Costs
มุมมอง 6K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 21: Bertrand Duopoly with Asymmetric Costs
Game Theory 20: Bertrand Duopoly with Symmetric Costs
มุมมอง 1.2K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 20: Bertrand Duopoly with Symmetric Costs
Game Theory 19: Expected Payoffs in MixedStrategies
มุมมอง 4.6K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 19: Expected Payoffs in MixedStrategies
Game Theory 18: Best Responses in Mixed Strategies
มุมมอง 2.9K4 ปีที่แล้ว
Game Theory 18: Best Responses in Mixed Strategies
great video! thank you!
Ağzınıza sağlık :)
Thank you for your video. It really helped me to better understand the iteration method in infinite games. Greetings from Germany.
Thank you, really helpful and motivating video to get me into the mood of solving seemingly arbitrary static imperfect info games. This gives some much needed context, to the otherwise stale method-focused material on the topic out there.
I'm so glad it helps!
Thank you very much ! I find very helpful your videos
thx so much the visual of the fixed point theorem really helped
How can you mathematically evaluate the symmetry in step 4?
I'm not sure I understand this question. We know the game is symmetric because the firms have identical cost functions.
Hello, why haven't you differentiated between delta1 and delta2? While it doesn't make a difference for 2 rounds, shouldn't it matter 3rd round onwards? Or are you assuming both players to be equally patient? Thanks for the informative video.
You can absolutely write down a model in which each player has a different discount factor; we are assuming here that the players are equally patient. The same method we use here still works to find SPNE in your proposed model.
What happens to the marginal cost of firm 1 = 10. Why didnt we use it?
It's in there - we collected like terms as follows: Firm 1's profit = (130 - q1 - q2)q1 - 10q1 = (120 - q1 - q2)q1.
Thank you so much! Greetings from Germany
lovely explanation, thank you!
Hello, a small question, I am following your videos and the complete course. I wanted to ask you, what book do you recommend for the rest of the subject? For example, the game theory part, mixed strategies, dynamic games, etc. Thank you so much
Hello, what book do you recommend that includes exercises like the one in the video?
I recommend "Auction Theory" by Vijay Krishna - note that he does assume you already have a good understanding of game theory and are looking for an auction-specific textbook,
Helped clarify the concept of Bayesian update in Game theory! I was hung up at how it works! 3 minutes DONE! Thanks.
This is true gold. Thanks so much!
Thank you for considering a new playlist for Game Theory. Your lectures are crisp and informative, helps me a lot to grasp the fundamental concepts.
There's a market with n = 4 oligopolistic firms. The industry-wide output of is Q = 60 metric kilotons and a market price of (when expressed per metric kiloton) p = 30 mio. €. The marginal cost parameters are c1=6, c2=7, c3=8 and c4=9 (total cost per firm: ci * qi). The firms in this market can be best thought of as choosing outputs (not prices). Assume that the inverse market demand function can be described by the following functional form: Price = A - bQ. How can we find the NE if we have two unknown? Being A and b if we have the input of A = 30 + 60b?
A and b are not unknowns - they are parameters. You want to find q1, q2, q3, q4 in terms of A and b.
I don't really understand how. I must use the Nash equilibrium analysis to determine estimates for the demand function parameters A and b, so I could eventually draw a conclusion on how much market share each firm has. A = 30 + 60b and b = (A - 30) / 60, now if I plug each in, I just get A=A and b=b, which is not getting me very far, I tried using the profit function πi = (p - ci) * Qi and derivate but I still get mixed conclusions.. Would appreciate some help if it seems evident, I am just confused.. Thank you! @@naomiutgoff
that's a very intuitive explanation, thanks for the dedication!
My pleasure!
thanks
Thank you! There is many people on here talking about how to read empirics, but you are the first person I found discussing how to approach theory in econ
thanks a lot professor. it was so helpfull
Thank you!
Hello, thank you very much for the video! I read some papers and they were talking about this game not having pure strategy NE but mix strategy NE. Could you please explain at the end why did you say that there is no MSNE. Thank you very much
what textbook have you used in the video, if any?
No text book per se, but I closely follow Prof. Lawrence Ausubel's graduate game theory class (the first one I took). He uses Robert Gibbons "Game Theory for Applied Economists" which I like very much.
Great!
Hi Naomi! Could you please provide the source from which you are picking that concrete form of the utility function? I am working in group tasks seen as PGGs and this form of the utility function is particularly convenient. Thanks!
There isn't a particular empirical source here. The idea is that the personal cost of effort increases faster than the communal benefit of effort.
@@naomiutgoff Thank you! your videos are very helpful.
Thank you for the video! I do have a (relatively) related question: I know the threshold public good game (with binary effort) by Palfrey and Rosenthal, but I don't know if anyone has done any work on the arbitrary effort. May I know if this reminds you of any particular papers?
No, sorry. Public goods aren't my research focus so while I'm familiar with the basics I am not close to the literature.
@@naomiutgoff Thanks anyways!
situation is two firms compete in same market and situation are, suppose; (1) (current condition of market) firm A has 60% market share and firm B has 20 % under the competition policy (2) Firm A has 40% and Firm B also has 40% (3) Firm A has 30 % and Firm B has 60 market share. So how we proof it Nash equilibrium through game theory ? Please help me in this matter. Thank You Professor
You will obtain different market shares in Nash equilibrium if you start with firms with different costs. Try P = 11 - q1 - q2, c1 = 3, c2 =4. The Nash equilibrium quantities are q1 = 3, q2 = 2. Firm 1 (the low cost firm) has more of the market than firm 2 (the high cost firm). In this example, firm 1 has 60% of the market and firm 2 has 40% of the market. In real life, differences in market share are often due to factors beyond cost of production. One natural weakness of the Cournot model is that firms produce perfect substitutes, i.e. completely identical goods. Firms in real life produce partial substitutes, i.e. similar but not the same goods (think Coke vs. Pepsi).
@@naomiutgoff Professor Please share your email. I want to show you my work
Thank you for your explanation professor
shouldn't be 130-q1-q2?
Yes: 130 - Q = 130 - (q1 + q2) = 130 - q1 - q2.
Great job
I'm glad it was helpful!
What if for the ultimatum game (one round) the payoff of reject were 0,5, 0,5?
You should try doing backwards induction with those payoffs - let me know what you find!
Thankyou so much ma’am for explaining each n every thing thoroughly 🙏
My pleasure 😊
this video really helped me out, thank you, Naomi!
Glad it was helpful!
thank you prof
You are welcome
Very helpful and clear thanks a lot!
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you so much for this video!
Glad it was helpful!
mam your lectures are amazing it would be great if you could upload other lectures of game theory too
I'm so glad they are helpful. It's unlikely at this time that I will add more videos. This series is for a course I taught online at the beginning of the pandemic. To be sure, there are lots of game theory topics I didn't cover in the course.
Wait I thought first-price auctions weren't incentive compatible (4:43)
Some are, some are not! This one is, i.e. when all bidders use the bidding strategy we calculated here, no one bidder can improve expected payoff by plugging a value not their own into the bidding function. You can check by finding argmax_w [F(w)^(N - 1)] (v - b(w)). You should get w = v.
I think there is a mistake at (0:57): it says "valuations are uniform on [0,1]" but the example v's go up to 6. Also, do you know what would the situation look like if the distribution was discrete? Thanks
Oops; these examples are inconsistent. The idea is to show how the auction works given a set of bids, and how to compute each bidder's payoff. The rest of the video is consistent with types in [0,1].
You've explained it perfectly, all your Game Theory videos are really helpful, Thank you!
Glad you like them!
you didnt mention games of chance and games of skill. only games of strategy
In games of pure chance we think of nature as the only player. Economically, we can think of strategy as including skill - namely, the skill to play selfishly and rationally. You might be interested in so-called trembling hand perfect equilibrium. I didn't cover in these videos, but it loosely means strategy profiles in which small mistakes don't matter.
That's a curious choice of terminology, where is it from? I've only ever heard the term "normal-form game" used synonymously to strategic-form i.e. games represented by functions from a set of strategy profiles to payoffs (sometimes denoted as a matrix).
Another way to put describe matrix vs. normal is that the matrix is a particular representation of the normal form. Sometimes the matrix representation is elegant; other times no so much. I believe the terms originated with Von Neumann and Morgenstern.
@@naomiutgoff oh, i see what you mean, thanks
this is helping me understand game theory better
Very professional teaching! Thank you Prof. Utgoff.
Really helpful
Glad it helped
thanks
thanks so much madam this is really awesome and helpful.
amazing explanation
I m also student of game theory and working on some new results of fixed point in game theory