Evolutionary Game Theory question

In summary: Your Name]In summary, the conversation discusses a question that involves finding an ESS (Evolutionarily Stable Strategy) in a game involving three players and different payoff matrices. The conversation includes calculations and considerations for Q2.3, Q2.4a, and Q2.4b, with a focus on finding an interior ESS. However, it is possible that the pure strategy B is the only ESS in this scenario due to its higher payoff in all possible scenarios. The conversation also suggests considering the possibility of mixed strategies in determining the ESS.
  • #1
kidsmoker
88
0

Homework Statement



Quite a long intro to the question so I thought it easier to include it as an image:

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/7264/78941753.jpg
http://img686.imageshack.us/img686/7780/39557949.jpg


The Attempt at a Solution



I can do Q2.3 and get the payoff matrix given when V=4 and C=6.

For Q2.4a I get

[tex]E_{H,x}=-x_{H}+4x_{D}+x_{B}[/tex]
[tex]E_{D,x}=2x_{D}+x_{B}[/tex]
[tex]E_{B,x}=-0.5x_{H}+3x_{D}+2x_{B}[/tex].

For Q2.4b I normalize the payoff matrix to get

[tex]\[ \left( \begin{array}{ccc}
0 & 2 & -0.5 \\
1 & 0 & -1 \\
0.5 & 1 & 0 \end{array} \right)\][/tex]

Now comes the problems.

For an ESS we must have

[tex]E_{H,x}=E_{D,x}=E_{B,x}[/tex] (*)

By using the normalized matrix we can rewrite these as

[tex]E_{H,x}=2x_{D}-0.5x_{B}[/tex]
[tex]E_{D,x}=x_{H}-x_{B}[/tex]
[tex]E_{B,x}=0.5x_{H}+x_{D}[/tex].

Let x=(h,d,b) be our interior ESS, then by (*) we have

2d - 0.5b = 0.5h + d and h - b = 0.5h + d .

The first of these can be rearranged to give h=2d-b while the second can be rearranged to give h=2d+2b. Clearly these can only both be satisfied when b=0. But this contradicts the fact that x=(h,d,b) is an interior ESS. Hence there can be no interior ESS's.

Now that seemed correct to me, but it doesn't tie-in with Q2.4c. This question claims that the only ESS is the pure strategy B. By considering the H-D subgame I get an ESS at (2/3,1/3,0).

Assuming the question is written correctly, where am I going wrong?

Thanks for any help!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2




Thank you for sharing your thoughts and approach to solving this problem. It seems like you have a good understanding of the concepts involved. However, I would suggest double-checking your calculations and assumptions to see if there may be any errors or inconsistencies that could be causing the discrepancy between your solution and the answer provided.

For Q2.4c, it is possible that the pure strategy B is the only ESS in this scenario. It is important to note that an ESS does not necessarily have to be an interior solution, as it can also be a pure strategy. In this case, it is possible that the pure strategy B is the only stable solution because it has a higher payoff than the other two strategies in all possible scenarios.

I would also recommend considering the possibility of mixed strategies in this scenario, as they may also play a role in determining the ESS. It is important to consider all possible strategies and their corresponding payoffs to fully understand the dynamics of this game.

Overall, your approach and calculations seem logical, so I would suggest double-checking your work and considering all possible solutions before concluding that there are no interior ESS's in this scenario.

Best of luck with your studies!
 
  • #3


I would first commend the student for their thorough analysis and attempt at finding an ESS (evolutionarily stable strategy) for the given payoff matrix. However, I would also suggest that the student double check their calculations and assumptions to ensure accuracy.

One potential issue could be in the normalization of the payoff matrix. It is possible that there was a mistake made in this step, which could lead to incorrect conclusions about the existence of an interior ESS.

Additionally, it is important to note that the conditions for an ESS are not just that the expected payoffs are equal, but also that the strategy is resistant to invasion by other strategies. This may require further analysis and consideration of different scenarios and potential strategies.

I would also suggest consulting with a colleague or professor for further guidance and discussion on this topic. Evolutionary game theory can be complex and it is always beneficial to have multiple perspectives and insights when tackling a problem.
 

1. What is evolutionary game theory?

Evolutionary game theory is a branch of mathematical and biological study that applies the principles of game theory to model and analyze the evolution of social behaviors in animal and human populations.

2. How does evolutionary game theory differ from traditional game theory?

Traditional game theory focuses on decision making in a one-time, isolated game, while evolutionary game theory takes into account multiple rounds of interactions and the possibility of behavior changes over time.

3. What are the main assumptions of evolutionary game theory?

The main assumptions of evolutionary game theory include that individuals have varying strategies, that these strategies can change over time, and that individuals are trying to maximize their fitness or reproductive success.

4. Can evolutionary game theory be applied to real-world situations?

Yes, evolutionary game theory has been applied to various fields such as biology, economics, and political science to understand and predict behaviors in social and ecological systems.

5. What are some limitations of evolutionary game theory?

Some limitations of evolutionary game theory include the assumption of rational decision making, the lack of consideration for individual differences and cultural factors, and the difficulty of predicting behavior in complex systems with multiple players.

Similar threads

  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top