博弈论导论

• lleiou

  2017-02-09
  It is easy to see that the game has two pure-strategy equilibria: (S, S) and (H, H). However, the payoff from (S , S) Pareto dominates that from (H , H). Why then would (H, H) ever be a reasonable prediction? This is precisely the strength of the Nash equilibrium concept. If each player anticipates that the other will not join forces, then he knows that going out to hunt the stag alone is not likely to be a successful enterprise and that going after the hare will be better. This belief would result in a society of individualists who do not cooperate to achieve a better outcome. In contrast, if the players expect each other to be cooperative in going after the stag, then this anticipation is self-fulfilling and results in what can be considered a cooperative society. In the real world, soci...
• lleiou

  2017-02-09
  The French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau presented the following situation that describes a trade-off between playing it safe and relying on others to achieve a larger gain. Two hunters, players 1 and 2, can each choose to hunt a stag (S), which provides a rather large and tasty meal, or hunt a hare (H)—also tasty, but much less filling. Hunting stags is challenging and requires mutual cooperation. If either hunts a stag alone, the chance of success is negligible, while hunting hares is an individualistic enterprise that is not done in pairs. Hence hunting stags is most beneficial for society but requires “trust” between the hunters in that each believes that the other is joining forces with him. The game, often referred to as the Stag Hunt game, can be described by the following matri...