Market mechanisms and stochastic programming
|
|
- Beatrice Carson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Market mechanisms and stochastic programming Kjetil K. Haugen and Stein W. Wallace Molde University College, Servicebox 8, N-6405 Molde, Norway Abstract There are two types of random phenomena modelled in stochastic programs. One type is what we may term external or natural random variables, such as temperature or the roll of a dice. But in many other cases, random variables are used to reflect the behavior of other market participants. This is the case for such as price and demand of a product. Using simple game theoretic models, we demonstrate that stochastic programming may not be appropriate in these cases, as there is no feasible way to replace the market mechanism by a random variable, and arrive at the correct decision. Hence, this simple note is a warning against certain types of stochastic programming models. Stochastic programming is unproblematic in pure forms of monopoly and perfect competition, and also with respect to external random phenomena. But in oligopolies, the modeling may not be approapriate. 1 Introduction The community of stochastic optimization is growing. Many universities have developed courses, although mostly at graduate level, and textbooks have started to appear. Examples of textbooks solely devoted to stochastic programming are Kall and Wallace [4] and Birge and Louveaux [2], but also more standard texts have started to include the matter. Despite the importance of stochastic programming for properly capturing the effects of uncertainty in decision-making under uncertainty (see for example Wallace [8]) there are also traps to be aware of. This paper is concerned with one potential problem of stochastic programs the inability to capture certain market mechanisms. The conclusions are not going to be a return to 1
2 determinsitic models, but a warning about the limitations of stochastic programs. Consequently, the focus we have is on stochastic programming and market mechanisms. Especially, we will focus on game theory which treats market mechanisms in a eneral way, and try to compare stochastic programming with game theory. We shall also give some general guidelines with respect to which situations require special care when formulating and solving stochastic programming problems. 2 Markets As the introduction indicates, the notion of a market is important. Let us look at some standard economic textbooks and their market definitions to see that the term is far from well defined. In a typical microeconomic textbook, A. Schotter [6] defines a market the following way: By a market, we mean a place where agents can go and exchange one good for another at a fixed price An alternative to this fairly narrow definition is for instance found in Gravell and Rees [3] substantially more advanced book (also in microeconomics): A market exists whenever two or more individuals are prepared to enter into an exchange transaction, regardless of time or place A comparison of the two definitions shows that economists do not have a simple stringent market definition. This is confirmed by Tirole in The Theory of Industrial Organization [7]. He says: There is no simple recipe for defining a market, as is demonstrated by the many debates among economists and antitrust practitioners about the degree of monopoly power in specific industries. Consequently, economists define a market relative to the problem at hand. We shall do the same. The following definition will serve our purpose. A market exists whenever two or more individuals are prepared to make decisions or actions which will result in utility function consequences for at least one of them, regardless of time or place Here, the term exchange transaction is substituted with the term decisions or actions which will result in utility function consequences for at least one of them. Clearly, this definition is more general, and will cover the two other definitions, as trade between agents involving prices definitely can be viewed as making special decisions involving utility function consequences. Additionally, this definition covers other situations, not necessarily involving trade. 2
3 In subsequent paragraphs, we will examine some extremely simple stochastic optimization problems, and their correspondence with games. At this point it is important to point out what type of situations we are discussing. Random variables are used for many purposes in stochastic programming. We have purely random phenomena, such as the roll of a dice, or the temperature next Midsummer Night. Then, we have phenomena which to a smaller or larger extent are consequences of other peoples actions. Examples here can be the demand for a product, which may depend on the actions of our customers as well as those of our competitors, or the price for a product, depending much on the same actors. This paper concerns only the latter type of random phenomena those that to some extent are a result of actions by others. Or to put it a bit differently, cases where we use random variables to capture the effect of other peoples actions, as we are unable or unwilling to model their actual behavior. 3 A simple stochastic optimization problem Figure 1: A simple decision tree The decision tree in Figure 1 describes an extremely simple stochastic optimization problem. We have made it as simple as possible in order to prove a point. Here, a decision maker (called D 1 ) faces a choice between two possible decisions; d 1 or d 2. A choice of d 1 yields either 4 or 2 with equal probabilities. Alternatively, a choice of d 2 yields 3 or 10 with the same equal probabilities. Assuming that these numbers are measured correctly (utils), and that the decision maker agrees with the Expected Utility Maximization theory, the solution is straightforward, { 1 max 2 (4 + 2), 1 } (3 + 10) = 6.5 (1) 2 3
4 and the optimal decision is d 2. Let us now assume that the decision maker actually participates in a simple 2-player game, but that her knowledge of game theory is limited, so she has chosen [ to model the other decision maker s choices by the probability distribution 1 2, ] 1 2, as depicted in Figure 1. The real game, involving simultaneous actions by the two players is fully described by the strategic form in Figure 2 Figure 2: A simple 2-player game The strategic form of a two player game is merely a double utility (or Payoff as game theorists like to name it) matrix, containing the player outcomes from various actions. As Figure 2 indicates, Player 1, whom we have named D 1 in Figure 1, gets 4 or 2 by the choice of her action d 1 if Player 2 chooses his actions s 1 or s 2, respectively. Alternatively, Player 1 obtains 3 or 10 by her choice of action d 2 if Player 2 chooses his actions s 1 or s 2. The numbers above the diagonal in Figure 2 correspond to pay-offs for Player 2. The game-theoretic solutional concept most widely acknowledged is the Nash equilibrium. A Nash equilibrium in a 2-player game is, simply stated, a pair of actions such that a deviation from these actions would yield a utility reduction for the player making the decision. A simple way to find Nash equilibria is to construct the so-called best reply functions or mappings. A best reply function is a function giving optimal actions (maximal utility or maximal expected utility) for each player as a function of the other player s actions. A Nash equilibrium is then all intersections between best reply functions. These intersections would imply best reply for both players. This procedure is easily carried out in strategic formed 2-player games by maximizing columns for Player 1 (circles) and rows for Player 2 (squares). Any strategy pair with both a circle and a square is then a Nash equilibrium point, as depicted in Figure 3. The Nash equilibrium point, or the predicted game theoretic solution, is the strategy pair (d 1, s 1 ). If we compare this solution to the solution of the corresponding stochastic optimization problem (1) we immediately observe a 4
5 Figure 3: A Nash equilibrium point divergence. The stochastic programming approach provides a wrong answer! This is surely one important observation; missing to identify a market mechanism in formulating stochastic optimization problems is dangerous 1. Another important observation is the fact that we can obtain the correct answer by changing the probability distribution in Figure 1. Again, it is straightforward to realize that to reach a correct solution, a change in the probability distribution of Player 2 s choices from [ 1 2, 1 2] to [q, 1 q] where q satisfies: 4 q + 2 (1 q) > 3 q + 10 (1 q) or q > 8 9 (2) would guarantee the correct solution, that is, Player 1 chooses d 1 as her optimal decision. To a certain extent, this seems reassuring and sensible. Given that market interactions exist, we could still rely on solving stochastic optimization problems, if we were able to adjust the probability distributions to take such a market interaction into account. That is, the market mechanism in this case does not produce a price, which would be the normal economic theoretic situation, but a probability constraint. This type of example is by no means the authors invention. Many modern textbooks on game theory apply the method of moving from a stochastic optimization problem to the generalization, a game theoretic problem, as a pedagogical mean see for instance Rasmusen s recent edition [5]. The argument concerning the probability constraint on q is however the author s responsibility. 1 Surely, this reasoning relies on the simple assumption that the game theoretic formulation is more correct than the stochastic optimization formulation. Given this simple example, this is easy to accept. Practical, more complex situations, may however raise more serious problems in this respect 5
6 4 Another simple stochastic optimization problem The example in the previous paragraph indicates that the correct game theoretic solution may be obtained by a correct adjustment of probability distributions. One important question to answer is then whether this is a general conclusion, or if certain gaming situations may lead to the substantially more negative conclusion: the stochastic optimization formulation will never provide the correct answer. Unfortunately, as the example in Figure 4 will show, this is indeed the case. Figure 4: Another simple decision tree Figure 4 should not need further explanation apart from the fact that the probability distribution is made parametric [q, 1 q], and that a utility parameter ɛ > 0 is introduced. It is straightforward to realize that for any given q, variations in ɛ could produce any solution to the decision problem as indicated by Table 1. Figure 5 shows the corresponding game with best reply functions included. Table 1: Parametric solutions for the problem in Figure 4 ɛ > 1 q q ɛ < 1 q q ɛ = 1 q q d 1 d 2 d 1 d 2 d 1 d 2 Comparing Figure 5 with Figure 4 we observe that no Nash equilibrium exists. From a game theoretic point of view, this is surely not satisfying any game should at least have one solution. Without jumping too deeply into game theory, the concept of randomized strategies is introduced. A random- 6
7 Figure 5: Another strategic form game ized strategy is as the name indicates, a probabilistic strategy. That is, the players are allowed to choose between their discrete strategies d 1, d 2 and s 1, s 2 by probability distributions [p, 1 p] [q, 1 q] for Player 1 and 2, respectively. The mathematical implication of such an enhancement of the decision space is obvious; the solution space is changed from a non-convex to a convex space. Consequently, game theory is able to launch existence proofs in this type of games. However, as stated earlier, our concern is not game theory here, so let us jump to the conclusion 2 : A Nash equilibrium in randomized strategies exists in this game: ( ) 1 (p, q ) = 3, 1 (3) ɛ + 1 The practical meaning of this is that Player 1 (or D 1 ) should choose action d 1 with a probability of 1 3 and d 2 with a probability of 2 3. It should be obvious, that we are simply not able to mumble around with q and ɛ in the original stochastic optimization problem and obtain such a solution. Even if we introduce randomized strategies as a possibility in the stochastic optimization problem, which would yield the following optimization problem for D 1, (The decision maker chooses strategy d 1 with probability p and strategy d 2 with probability 1 p in Figure 4) H(q, ɛ) = max {qpɛ + (1 q)(1 p) q [0, 1]} (4) p [0,1] the situation would be unchanged. The optimization problem in equation (4) is for any given q (and ɛ) linear in p and the solution for p could either be 0,1 or 2 Any standard text book in game theory shows how randomized strategy Nash equilibria are computed see for instance Ken Binmore s Fun and Games [1] for an excellent introduction to the topic 7
8 any number in the interval [0,1] depending on the parameters. In no case will the stochastic program give us the unique probability distribution [ 1 3, 3] 2, which was the optimal game theoretic solution. Consequently, we have shown by an example that we in general can not guarantee that a game theoretic problem can be solved as a stochastic optimization problem. 5 Back to Markets In section 2, we discussed the market concept. The basic result there was the introduction of a fairly general market definition. Now, if this generalized market definition creates divergence between game- and stochastic optimization problems, any less general market definitions should hold the potential of similar divergence. Obviously, normal market structures involving price formation is what we think of here they are definitely less general. Such markets are in principle characterized by the same structural properties as our market definition implies; decisions on quantity and price may affect all competing agents utility functions. The major point here is to a certain extent simple. The basic functionality of these types of market mechanisms is to establish values. No value can be established without a market mechanism, and as almost all practical stochastic optimization problems involves maximizing some kind of expected profit or minimizing some kind of expected cost, it is obvious that market mechanisms are present. There are however, two noteworthy exceptions to the warning against stochastic programming; Monopoly and Perfect Competition 5.1 Monopoly Monopoly implies that we are the only seller in a market. Hence, there are no competitors to take into account when modeling. Note that this is a very strict assumption. If our product has a substitute, even if it is not a perfect one, we do not have a monopoly in a proper sense. Furthermore, for a monopoly to represent a simple case, the demand side must consist of only small players price-takers. If there are large players on the demand side, we are still monopolists, but the case is not a simple one. So, the simple case is when we are a monopoly and the demand side consists of only small price-taking participants. We can then assume that whatever price we set, the consumer will take it for granted, and then buy whatever he finds appropriate at that price. It may be that the demand is also affected by some external random variables (like temperature), but that is unproblematic in this context if we can predict what the demand will be for each possible value of the 8
9 random variables. The crucial point is that we have no other participants in the market making strategic decisions that we have to relate to. Of course, the above also apply if we are a monopsony, and all sellers are small price-takers. 5.2 Perfect Competition By perfect competition we here mean that all sellers and buyers are small and take the price for given. Hence, not a single player in the market can or will make strategic decisions. External random phenomena may affect the price, but all market participants simply observe the effects. In this case, planning is simple, at least as long as we understand the external random phenomena. But there are no problems of the type we observed in the example. We are too small to make strategic decisions, and we do not have to be worried that others make some that will affect us. 5.3 Oligopoly In economic theory, all market situations which can not be characterized as either monopoly or perfect competition are named oligopolies. As the above discussion should indicate, extreme care must be taken when formulating and solving stochastic optimization problems involving values which are a result of non-monopoly or non-perfectly competitive markets. Unfortunately, most markets are of this type; and as such, the correct guideline would be to use game theory instead of stochastic optimization. However, game theoretic progress, from a practical point of view, is very slow, and only very small and simplified problems can be analyzed. This applies to both numerical and closedform analytical approaches. Hence, stochastic programming has its obvious place. It would of course be very nice if we could characterize markets where the gaming-effect is insignificant and as such point out areas where stochastic programming is unproblematic from a theoretical point of view. Unfortunately, this theory does not exist, apart from the abovementioned cases of monopoly and perfect competition. 6 Conclusions Even though the former paragraphs seem to offer a fairly negative conclusion; stochastic programming is hardly ever appropriate, some important practical guidelines may be drawn. Firstly, the notion of two types of probabilities, the natural probabilities and the probabilities representing market interactions is an important partitioning in itself. Consequently, if a stochastic programming problem involves merely the first type of probabilities, it is straightforward to produce practical solutions and use them in decision-making. If, alternatively, 9
10 a stochastic programming problem contains probabilities within the second set, some more caution must be taken. One practical way of being considerate may be to introduce sensitivity analysis on these probabilities in order to secure robustness against possible market forces implied by these probabilities. (But as we have noted, in many cases there does not exist any probabilities leading to the correct decisions). Last, but not least, game theory may be applied on the side in order to try to repartition the second set of probabilities into several sub-sets with different market characteristics. Some intuition on the markets underlying these subsets may then be used as input in a more refined sensitivity analysis on probabilities. References [1] K. Binmore. Fun and Games. D. C. Heath and Company, Lexington, Massachusettes, Toronto, [2] John Birge and Francois Louveaux. Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, [3] H. Gravelle and R. Rees. Microeconomics. Longman, London and New York, [4] Peter Kall and Stein W. Wallace. Stochastic Programming. Wiley, Chichester, [5] E. Rasmusen. Games and Information. Blackwell, Oxford, UK, [6] A. Schotter. Microeconomics A Modern Approach. HarperCollins, New York, [7] J. Tirole. The Theory of Industrial Organization. MIT Press, Cambridge Mass., London, [8] Stein W. Wallace. Decision making under uncertainty: Is sensitivity analysis of any use? Operations Research, 48(1):20 25,
Modeling of competition in revenue management Petr Fiala 1
Modeling of competition in revenue management Petr Fiala 1 Abstract. Revenue management (RM) is the art and science of predicting consumer behavior and optimizing price and product availability to maximize
More informationChapter 9: Static Games and Cournot Competition
Chapter 9: Static Games and Cournot Competition Learning Objectives: Students should learn to:. The student will understand the ideas of strategic interdependence and reasoning strategically and be able
More informationEcon 101A Solutions for Final exam - Fall 2006
Econ 101A Solutions for Final exam - Fall 2006 Problem 1. Shorter problems. (35 points) Solve the following shorter problems. 1. Consider the following (simultaneous) game of chicken. This is a game in
More informationDo not open this exam until told to do so. Solution
Do not open this exam until told to do so. Department of Economics College of Social and Applied Human Sciences K. Annen, Fall 003 Final (Version): Intermediate Microeconomics (ECON30) Solution Final (Version
More information14.01 Principles of Microeconomics, Fall 2007 Chia-Hui Chen November 7, Lecture 22
Monopoly. Principles of Microeconomics, Fall Chia-Hui Chen November, Lecture Monopoly Outline. Chap : Monopoly. Chap : Shift in Demand and Effect of Tax Monopoly The monopolist is the single supply-side
More information"Solutions" to Non-constant Sum Games
Unit 3 GAME THEORY Lesson 30 Learning Objective: Analyze two person non-zero sum games. Analyze games involving cooperation. Hello students, The well-defined rational policy in neoclassical economics --
More informationAim of the Course. Behavioral Economics. Why Are We Here? Why Are You Here? Some Things to Bear In Mind. Positive vs Normative Economics 1/20/2017
Aim of the Course Behavioral Economics Mark Dean Spring 07 Columbia University An introduction to the main topics in behavioral economics Theories of economic behavior that fall outside the standard model
More informationChapter 28: Monopoly and Monopsony
Chapter 28: Monopoly and Monopsony 28.1: Introduction The previous chapter showed that if the government imposes a tax on some good that there is a loss of surplus. We show a similar result in this chapter
More information5/2/2016. Intermediate Microeconomics W3211. Lecture 25: Recap 2. The Story So Far. Organization for the Week. Introduction
1 Intermediate Microeconomics W3211 Lecture 25: Recap 2 Introduction Columbia University, Spring 2016 Mark Dean: mark.dean@columbia.edu 2 The Story So Far. 3 The Story So Far. 4 Topic Topic 1 The Consumer
More informationLesson-28. Perfect Competition. Economists in general recognize four major types of market structures (plus a larger number of subtypes):
Lesson-28 Perfect Competition Economists in general recognize four major types of market structures (plus a larger number of subtypes): Perfect Competition Monopoly Oligopoly Monopolistic competition Market
More informationEcon 201 Review Notes - Part 3
Econ 201 Review Notes - Part 3 This is intended as a supplement to the lectures and section. It is what I would talk about in section if we had more time. After the first three chapters where we talked
More informationFIRST FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF WELFARE ECONOMICS
FIRST FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF WELFARE ECONOMICS SICONG SHEN Abstract. Markets are a basic tool for the allocation of goods in a society. In many societies, markets are the dominant mode of economic exchange.
More informationINDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS, WITH APPLICATIONS TO E-COMMERCE An Option for MSc Economics and MSc E-Commerce Autumn Term 2003
School of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS, WITH APPLICATIONS TO E-COMMERCE An Option for MSc Economics and MSc E-Commerce Autumn Term 2003 1. Strategic Interaction and Oligopoly
More informationINTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS (EC201)
INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS (EC201) Course duration: 54 hours lecture and class time (Over three weeks) Summer School Programme Area: Economics LSE Teaching Department: Department of Economics Lead Faculty:
More informationGraham Romp Dynamic Game Theory.
Graham Romp Dynamic Game Theory. In the previous chapter we focused on static games. However for many important economic applications we need to think of the game as being played over a number of time
More informationnot to be republished NCERT Chapter 6 Non-competitive Markets 6.1 SIMPLE MONOPOLY IN THE COMMODITY MARKET
Chapter 6 We recall that perfect competition was theorised as a market structure where both consumers and firms were price takers. The behaviour of the firm in such circumstances was described in the Chapter
More informationEconomics II - October 27, 2009 Based on H.R.Varian - Intermediate Microeconomics. A Modern Approach
Economics II - October 7, 009 Based on H.R.Varian - Intermediate Microeconomics. A Modern Approach GAME THEORY Economic agents can interact strategically in a variety of ways, and many of these have been
More informationOn Optimal Multidimensional Mechanism Design
On Optimal Multidimensional Mechanism Design YANG CAI, CONSTANTINOS DASKALAKIS and S. MATTHEW WEINBERG Massachusetts Institute of Technology We solve the optimal multi-dimensional mechanism design problem
More informationChapter 8: Exchange. 8.1: Introduction. 8.2: Exchange. 8.3: Individual A s Preferences and Endowments
Chapter 8: Exchange 8.1: Introduction In many ways this chapter is the most important in the book. If you have time to study just one, this is the one that you should study (even though it might be a bit
More information1.. Consider the following multi-stage game. In the first stage an incumbent monopolist
University of California, Davis Department of Economics Time: 3 hours Reading time: 20 minutes PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION FOR THE Ph.D. DEGREE Industrial Organization June 27, 2006 Answer four of the six
More informationAdvance Selling, Competition, and Brand Substitutability
Advance Selling, Competition, and Brand Substitutability Oksana Loginova October 27, 2016 Abstract This paper studies the impact of competition on the benefits of advance selling. I construct a two-period
More informationQuasi linear Utility and Two Market Monopoly
Quasi linear Utility and Two Market Monopoly By Stephen K. Layson Department of Economics 457 Bryan Building, UNCG Greensboro, NC 27412 5001 USA (336) 334 4868 Fax (336) 334 5580 layson@uncg.edu ABSTRACT
More informationUnderstanding UPP. Alternative to Market Definition, B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, forthcoming.
Understanding UPP Roy J. Epstein and Daniel L. Rubinfeld Published Version, B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics: Policies and Perspectives, Volume 10, Issue 1, 2010 Introduction The standard economic
More informationManagerial Economics, 01/12/2003. A Glossary of Terms
A Glossary of Terms The Digital Economist -A- Abundance--A physical or economic condition where the quantity available of a resource exceeds the quantity desired in the absence of a rationing system. Arbitrage
More informationOligopoly: How do firms behave when there are only a few competitors? These firms produce all or most of their industry s output.
Topic 8 Chapter 13 Oligopoly and Monopolistic Competition Econ 203 Topic 8 page 1 Oligopoly: How do firms behave when there are only a few competitors? These firms produce all or most of their industry
More informationCopyright (C) 2001 David K. Levine This document is an open textbook; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of version 1 of the
Copyright (C) 2001 David K. Levine This document is an open textbook; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of version 1 of the open text license amendment to version 2 of the GNU General
More informationSimple Market Equilibria with Rationally Inattentive Consumers
Simple Market Equilibria with Rationally Inattentive Consumers Filip Matějka and Alisdair McKay January 16, 2012 Prepared for American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings Abstract We study a market
More informationEcon 121b: Intermediate Microeconomics
Econ 11b: Intermediate Microeconomics Dirk Bergemann, Spring 01 Week of 3/6-4/3 1 Lecture 16: Imperfectly Competitive Market 1.1 Price Discrimination In the previous section we saw that the monopolist
More informationIncentivised duopoly: profit maximisation or sales maximisation?
Incentivised duopoly: profit maximisation or sales maximisation? BAM 2002 British Academy of Management Annual Conference Hosted by Middlesex University Held in Novotel, Hammersmith, London Malcolm Brady
More informationUniform and Targeted Advertising with Shoppers and. Asymmetric Loyal Market Shares
Uniform and Targeted dvertising with Shoppers and symmetric Loyal Market Shares Michael rnold, Chenguang Li and Lan Zhang October 9, 2012 Preliminary and Incomplete Keywords: informative advertising, targeted
More informationHow Do Environmental and Natural Resource Economics Texts Deal With the Simple Model of the Intertemporal Allocation of a Nonrenewable Resource?
How Do Environmental and Natural Resource Economics Texts Deal With the Simple Model of the Intertemporal Allocation of a Nonrenewable Resource? by Robert S. Main* Professor of Economics College of Business
More informationINTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS LECTURE 13 - MONOPOLISTIC COMPETITION AND OLIGOPOLY. Monopolistic Competition
13-1 INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS LECTURE 13 - MONOPOLISTIC COMPETITION AND OLIGOPOLY Monopolistic Competition Pure monopoly and perfect competition are rare in the real world. Most real-world industries
More information9 The optimum of Oligopoly
Microeconomics I - Lecture #9, December 1, 2008 9 The optimum of Oligopoly During previous lectures we have investigated two important forms of market structure: pure competition, where there are typically
More informationSecond-Degree Price Discrimination for Information Goods Under Nonlinear Utility Functions
Second-Degree Price Discrimination for Information Goods Under Nonlinear Utility Functions Hemant K. Bhargava The Smeal College of Business Pennsylvania State University 342 Beam Building University Park,
More informationMicroeconomic Theory -1- Introduction and maximization
Microeconomic Theory -- Introduction and maximization Introduction Maximization. Profit maximizing firm with monopoly power 6. General results on maximizing with two variables 3. Non-negativity constraints
More informationTOPIC 4. ADVERSE SELECTION, SIGNALING, AND SCREENING
TOPIC 4. ADVERSE SELECTION, SIGNALING, AND SCREENING In many economic situations, there exists asymmetric information between the di erent agents. Examples are abundant: A seller has better information
More informationECON 2100 (Fall 2018 Section 11) Exam #3B
ECON 21 (Fall 218 Section 11) Exam #3B Multiple Choice Questions: (3 points each) 1. I am taking of the exam. B. Version B 2. Market Power refers to a situation in which A. a firm charges different consumers
More informationECON 2100 (Fall 2018 Section 11) Exam #3A
ECON 21 (Fall 218 Section 11) Exam #3A Multiple Choice Questions: (3 points each) 1. I am taking of the exam. A. Version A 2. Market Power refers to a situation in which A. a firm has some control over
More informationNetworks: Spring 2010 Homework 3 David Easley and Jon Kleinberg Due February 26, 2010
Networks: Spring 2010 Homework 3 David Easley and Jon Kleinberg Due February 26, 2010 As noted on the course home page, homework solutions must be submitted by upload to the CMS site, at https://cms.csuglab.cornell.edu/.
More informationDepartment of Economics. Harvard University. Spring Honors General Exam. April 6, 2011
Department of Economics. Harvard University. Spring 2011 Honors General Exam April 6, 2011 The exam has three sections: microeconomics (Questions 1 3), macroeconomics (Questions 4 6), and econometrics
More informationCARTEL STABILITY AND THE CURVATURE OF MARKET DEMAND. Luca Lambertini *
CARTEL STABILITY AND THE CURVATURE OF MARKET DEMAND Luca Lambertini * Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche # Università degli Studi di Bologna Strada Maggiore 45 4025 Bologna ITALY tel 39-5-6402600 fax 39-5-6402600
More informationUnit 13 AP Economics - Practice
DO NOT WRITE ON THIS TEST! Unit 13 AP Economics - Practice Multiple Choice Identify the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question. 1. A natural monopoly exists whenever a single
More informationIntermediate Microeconomics IMPERFECT COMPETITION BEN VAN KAMMEN, PHD PURDUE UNIVERSITY
Intermediate Microeconomics IMPERFECT COMPETITION BEN VAN KAMMEN, PHD PURDUE UNIVERSITY No, not the BCS Oligopoly: A market with few firms but more than one. Duopoly: A market with two firms. Cartel: Several
More informationReaction Paper Influence Maximization in Social Networks: A Competitive Perspective
Reaction Paper Influence Maximization in Social Networks: A Competitive Perspective Siddhartha Nambiar October 3 rd, 2013 1 Introduction Social Network Analysis has today fast developed into one of the
More informationChapter 15 Oligopoly
Goldwasser AP Microeconomics Chapter 15 Oligopoly BEFORE YOU READ THE CHAPTER Summary This chapter explores oligopoly, a market structure characterized by a few firms producing a product that mayor may
More informationIndustrial Organization 04
Industrial Organization 04 Product differentiation Marc Bourreau Telecom ParisTech Marc Bourreau (TPT) Lecture 04: Product differentiation 1 / 43 Outline 1 Introduction: forms of product differentiation
More informationEconS Competitive Markets Part 1
EconS 305 - Competitive Markets Part 1 Eric Dunaway Washington State University eric.dunaway@wsu.edu October 11, 2015 Eric Dunaway (WSU) EconS 305 - Lecture 19 October 11, 2015 1 / 48 Introduction Today,
More informationApplied Welfare Economics
Economics Monika Köppl - Turyna Department of Economics ISCTE-IUL Summer 2014/2015 Introduction We will have lectures and problem solving sessions (usually one per two lectures) Attendance is generally
More informationECN 3103 INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION
ECN 3103 INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION 5. Game Theory Mr. Sydney Armstrong Lecturer 1 The University of Guyana 1 Semester 1, 2016 OUR PLAN Analyze Strategic price and Quantity Competition (Noncooperative Oligopolies)
More informationCompetition: Boon or Bane for Reputation Building. Behavior. Somdutta Basu. October Abstract
Competition: Boon or Bane for Reputation Building Behavior Somdutta Basu October 2014 Abstract This paper investigates whether competition aids or hinders reputation building behavior in experience goods
More informationEconS Bertrand Competition
EconS 425 - Bertrand Competition Eric Dunaway Washington State University eric.dunaway@wsu.edu Industrial Organization Eric Dunaway (WSU) EconS 425 Industrial Organization 1 / 38 Introduction Today, we
More informationChapter 5. Market Equilibrium 5.1 EQUILIBRIUM, EXCESS DEMAND, EXCESS SUPPLY
Chapter 5 Price SS p f This chapter will be built on the foundation laid down in Chapters 2 and 4 where we studied the consumer and firm behaviour when they are price takers. In Chapter 2, we have seen
More informationEcon Microeconomic Analysis and Policy
ECON 500 Microeconomic Theory Econ 500 - Microeconomic Analysis and Policy Monopoly Monopoly A monopoly is a single firm that serves an entire market and faces the market demand curve for its output. Unlike
More informationTotal /18 /18 /16 /15 /15 /18 /100. Economics 142 Final Exam NAME Vincent Crawford Winter 2008
2 3 4 5 6 Total /8 /8 /6 /5 /5 /8 / Economics 42 Final Exam NAME Vincent Crawford Winter 28 Your grade from this exam is two thirds of your course grade. The exam ends promptly at 2:3, so you have three
More informationPARETO-IMPROVING CONGESTION PRICING AND REVENUE REFUNDING WITH ELASTIC DEMAND
PARETO-IMPROVING CONGESTION PRICING AND REVENUE REFUNDING WITH ELASTIC DEMAND Xiaolei Guo, Odette School of Business Cross-Border Transportation Centre University of Windsor Hai Yang, Department of Civil
More informationLecture 21: Strategic Interaction and Game Theory
Lecture 2: Strategic Interaction and Game Theory EC DD & EE / Manove Strategic Interaction p What types of firms are most likely to engage in costly rent-seeking? EC DD & EE / Manove Monopoly>Rent Seeking
More informationIndivisibilities in the Ricardian model of trade
Economics Working Paper Series 2016/012 Indivisibilities in the Ricardian model of trade Kwok Tong Soo The Department of Economics Lancaster University Management School Lancaster LA1 4YX UK Authors All
More informationGame Theory and Economics Prof. Dr. Debarshi Das Department of Humanities and Social Sciences Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati
Game Theory and Economics Prof. Dr. Debarshi Das Department of Humanities and Social Sciences Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati Module No. # 03 Illustrations of Nash Equilibrium Lecture No. # 01
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS. 13- Existence, stability, and uniqueness of equilibrium. 1. Learning Outcomes 2. Introduction 3.Meaning of Equilibrium
Subject ECONOMICS Paper No and Title Module No and Title Module Tag 5 Advanced Microeconomics 13- Existence, stability, and uniqueness of equilibrium ECO_P5_M13 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Learning Outcomes 2.
More informationExpressing Preferences with Price-Vector Agents in Combinatorial Auctions: A Brief Summary
Expressing Preferences with Price-Vector Agents in Combinatorial Auctions: A Brief Summary Robert W. Day PhD: Applied Mathematics, University of Maryland, College Park 1 Problem Discussion and Motivation
More informationPrinciples of Microeconomics Assignment 8 (Chapter 10) Answer Sheet. Class Day/Time
1 Principles of Microeconomics Assignment 8 (Chapter 10) Answer Sheet Name Class Day/Time Questions of this homework are in the next few pages. Please find the answer of the questions and fill in the blanks
More informationRSM 392H1: Competitive Strategy
RSM 392H1: Competitive Strategy University of Toronto Rotman School of Management Undergraduate Seminar Professor: Kevin A. Bryan Class Notes: Value Capture Theory Why do some firms persistently earn high
More informationPart II. Market power
Part II. Market power Chapter 3. Static imperfect competition Slides Industrial Organization: Markets and Strategies Paul Belleflamme and Martin Peitz Cambridge University Press 2009 Introduction to Part
More informationChristopher S. Ruebeck 1
Exploring the space of demand curves and consumer rationing rules Christopher S. Ruebeck 1 Lafayette College Department of Economics Easton PA 18042 ruebeckc@lafayette.edu Prepared for participants in
More informationPrinciples of Microeconomics Module 5.1. Understanding Profit
Principles of Microeconomics Module 5.1 Understanding Profit 180 Production Choices of Firms All firms have one goal in mind: MAX PROFITS PROFITS = TOTAL REVENUE TOTAL COST Two ways to reach this goal:
More informationOn the mode of Competition as a Collusive Perspective in Unionized Oligopoly
On the mode of Competition as a Collusive Perspective in Unionized Oligopoly Minas Vlassis * Maria Varvataki Department of Economics, University of Crete, Gallos University Campus, Rethymnon 74100, Greece
More informationUmbrella Branding Can Leverage Reputation, but only with Market Power. May 19, Eric B. Rasmusen
Umbrella Branding Can Leverage Reputation, but only with Market Power May 19, 2012 Eric B. Rasmusen Dan R. and Catherine M. Dalton Professor, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy, Kelley
More informationUnit 6: Non-Competitive Markets
Unit 6: Non-Competitive Markets Name: Date: / / Simple Monopoly in the Commodity Market A market structure in which there is a single seller is called monopoly. The conditions hidden in this single line
More informationManagerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S.J.M School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay. Lecture - 33 Oligopoly (Contd )
Managerial Economics Prof. Trupti Mishra S.J.M School of Management Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay Lecture - 33 Oligopoly (Contd ) We will continue our discussion on theory of Oligopoly, typically
More informationTHE LIKELIHOOD OF TRADE PATTERN CHANGES
THE LIKELIHOOD OF TRADE PATTERN CHANGES Lisandro Abrego University of Warwick Raymond Riezman University of Iowa John Whalley Universities of Warwick and Western Ontario and NBER December 2002 Abstract
More informationASSIGNMENT 4. Read all of the following information before starting the Assignment:
ASSIGNMENT 4 Principles of Economics EC 110-001 June 28, 2007 Name: } {{ } by writing my name i swear by the honor code Read all of the following information before starting the Assignment: You are not
More informationMicroeconomics LESSON 6 ACTIVITY 40
Microeconomics LESSON 6 ACTIVITY 40 Monopolistic Competition Figure 40.1 Monopolistically Competitive Firm in the Short Run MC COSTS/REVENUE (DOLLARS) E D C B A F H K G ATC D 0 MR L M QUANTITY 1. Use Figure
More informationEndogenous Sequential Entry in a Spatial Model Revisited. Georg Götz
Endogenous Sequential Entry in a Spatial Model Revisited Georg Götz Department of Economics, University of Vienna, BWZ - Bruenner Str. 72, A-1210 Vienna, Austria Abstract: This article reexamines sequential
More informationGame Theory Exam, June 2015
Game Theory Exam, June 2015 Name Group: You have two and a half hours to complete the exam. I. Short questions (5 points each) I.1 Show an example of a static game that has no Nash equilibrium in pure
More informationIO Field Examination Department of Economics, Michigan State University May 17, 2004
IO Field Examination Department of Economics, Michigan State University May 17, 004 This examination is four hours long. The weight of each question in the overall grade is indicated. It is important to
More informationChapter Summary and Learning Objectives
CHAPTER 11 Firms in Perfectly Competitive Markets Chapter Summary and Learning Objectives 11.1 Perfectly Competitive Markets (pages 369 371) Explain what a perfectly competitive market is and why a perfect
More informationThe Basic Spatial Model with a Single Monopolist
Economics 335 March 3, 999 Notes 8: Models of Spatial Competition I. Product differentiation A. Definition Products are said to be differentiated if consumers consider them to be imperfect substitutes.
More informationExcludable Public Goods
Contents 9 Excludable Public Goods 3 The Oakland Model of Competitive Supply............. 3 A fable............................... 4 Characteristics of Oakland Equilibrium............ 5 Some Thoughts on
More informationSolutions to Final Exam
Solutions to Final Exam AEC 504 - Summer 2007 Fundamentals of Economics c 2007 Alexander Barinov 1 Veni, vidi, vici (30 points) Two firms with constant marginal costs serve two markets for two different
More informationManaging Decentralized Inventory and Transhipment
Managing Decentralized Inventory and Transhipment Moshe Dror mdror@eller.arizona.edu Nichalin Suakkaphong nichalin@email.arizona.edu Department of MIS University of Arizona Fleet Size Mix and Inventory
More informationIn Chapter 3 we pointed out that there are two reasons why countries
Economies of Scale, Imperfect Competition, and International Trade 6 Chapter In Chapter 3 we pointed out that there are two reasons why countries specialize and trade. First, countries differ either in
More informationIncentives for Market Research: Preemption and Learning Effects
Incentives for Market Research: Preemption and Learning Effects Peter M. Kort, Pauli Murto, and Grzegorz Pawlina April 25, 2005 Preliminary and incomplete. Please do not quote. Abstract This paper is about
More informationPh.D. MICROECONOMICS CORE EXAM August 2012
Ph.D. MICROECONOMICS CORE EXAM August 2012 This exam is designed to test your broad knowledge of microeconomics. There are three sections: one required and two choice sections. You must complete both problems
More informationStatic (or Simultaneous- Move) Games of Complete Information
Static (or Simultaneous- Move) Games of Complete Information Dominated Strategies Nash Equilibrium F.Valognes - Game Theory - Chp 2 1 Outline of Static Games of Complete Information Introduction to games
More information1. Spatial Equilibrium Behavioral Hypotheses
University of California, Davis Department of Agricultural and esource Economics AE 252 Optimization with Economic Applications Lecture Notes 12 Quirino Paris 1. patial Equilibrium Behavioral Hypotheses.......................................
More informationLecture 21: Strategic Interaction and Game Theory
Lecture : Strategic Interaction and Game Theory EC DD & EE / Manove Strategic Interaction p EC DD & EE / Manove Clicker Question p Strategic Interaction In perfectly competitive markets (like the market
More informationIntro to Algorithmic Economics, Fall 2013 Lecture 1
Intro to Algorithmic Economics, Fall 2013 Lecture 1 Katrina Ligett Caltech September 30 How should we sell my old cell phone? What goals might we have? Katrina Ligett, Caltech Lecture 1 2 How should we
More informationLearning by Observing
Working Papers in Economics Learning by Observing Efe Postalcı, zmir University of Economics Working Paper #10/07 December 2010 Izmir University of Economics Department of Economics Sakarya Cad. No:156
More informationOligopoly. Quantity Price(per year) 0 $120 2,000 $100 4,000 $80 6,000 $60 8,000 $40 10,000 $20 12,000 $0
Oligopoly 1. Markets with only a few sellers, each offering a product similar or identical to the others, are typically referred to as a. monopoly markets. b. perfectly competitive markets. c. monopolistically
More informationECONOMICS. Paper 3 : Fundamentals of Microeconomic Theory Module 28 : Non collusive and Collusive model
Subject Paper No and Title Module No and Title Module Tag 3 : Fundamentals of Microeconomic Theory 28 : Non collusive and Collusive model ECO_P3_M28 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Learning Outcomes 2. Introduction
More informationSupplimentary material for Research at the Auction Block: Problems for the Fair Benefits Approach to International Research
Supplimentary material for Research at the Auction Block: Problems for the Fair Benefits Approach to International Research Alex John London Carnegie Mellon University Kevin J.S. Zollman Carnegie Mellon
More informationLecture Notes on Pure and Impure Public Goods by Dale Squires and Niels Vestergaard
This version 24 th January 2011 Lecture Notes on Pure and Impure Public Goods by Dale Squires and Niels Vestergaard 1. General Points About Public Goods Goods that are non rival and non excludable in consumption
More informationChapter 14 Oligopoly and Monopoly
Economics 6 th edition 1 Chapter 14 Oligopoly and Monopoly Modified by Yulin Hou For Principles of Microeconomics Florida International University Fall 2017 Oligopoly: a very different market structure
More informationFirms and Markets (Summer 2007)
Firms and Markets Professor John Asker Office: KMC 7-79 Telephone: (212) 998-0062 Email: jasker@stern.nyu.edu Firms and Markets (Summer 2007) Course Description The goal of this course is to give you some
More informationNotes on Intertemporal Consumption Choice
Paul A Johnson Economics 304 Advanced Topics in Macroeconomics Notes on Intertemporal Consumption Choice A: The Two-Period Model Consider an individual who faces the problem of allocating their available
More informationBoston Library Consortium Member Libraries
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Boston Library Consortium Member Libraries http://www.archive.org/details/howeffectiveispooofarr HB31.M415 woticmg paper department of economics
More informationGAME THEORY: Analysis of Strategic Thinking Exercises on Repeated and Bargaining Games
GAME THEORY: Analysis of Strategic Thinking Exercises on Repeated and Bargaining Games Pierpaolo Battigalli Università Bocconi A.Y. 2006-2007 Exercise 1. Consider the following Prisoner s Dilemma game.
More information14.27 Economics and E-Commerce Fall 14. Lecture 2 - Review
14.27 Economics and E-Commerce Fall 14 Lecture 2 - Review Prof. Sara Ellison MIT OpenCourseWare 4 basic things I want to get across in this review: Monopoly pricing function of demand, elasticity, & marginal
More informationIntroduction to Microeconomic Theory
Introduction to Microeconomic Theory Lectures in Microeconomic Theory Fall 2010, Part 1 07.07.2010 G.B. Asheim, ECON4230-35, #1 1 Why Microeconomics once more? Some new subjects Game theory new to some
More informationEXAMINATION #4 VERSION C General Equilibrium and Market Power November 24, 2015
Signature: William M. Boal Printed name: EXAMINATION #4 VERSION C General Equilibrium and Market Power November 24, 2015 INSTRUCTIONS: This exam is closed-book, closed-notes. Calculators, mobile phones,
More information