jueves, 24 de enero de 2013

Game Theory


Today I will be writing about Game Theory. You may ask “why should anybody write about something like that? “Well, since I was at University I have been captivated by Game Theory and its applications to real life conflicts. Recently, I had the opportunity to enroll a seven week long online course.

If you think Game Theory has something to do with complicated mathematic algorithms, impossible formulas, and so forth, you are very wrong!! I won´t say you won´t need any numerical background to understand Game Theory but I can definitely assure you, that you don´t need to be Stephen Hawkins to learn the basics.

Game theory is the study of strategic decision making. More formally, it is "the study of mathematical models of conflict and cooperation between intelligent rational decision makers" game theory has been used to study a wide variety of human and animal behaviors. It was initially developed in economics to understand a large collection of economic behaviors, but the use of game theory in the social sciences has expanded, and game theory has been applied to political, sociological, and psychological behaviors as well.

A game consists of a set of players, a set of strategies available to those players, and a set of payoffs for each combination of strategies.

There are several types of games, but the most common are:

Cooperative/ Non cooperative: A game is cooperative if the players are able to form binding commitments and it´s non cooperative if this is not possible.

Symmetric/ Non symmetric: A symmetric game is a game where the payoffs for playing a particular strategy depend only on the other strategies employed, not on who is playing them. We can say that if the identities of the players can be changed without changing the payoff to the strategies, then a game is symmetric.

Zero sum/ No zero sum: In zero-sum games the total benefit to all players in the game, always adds to zero. In the other hand, non-zero-sum games has net results greater or less than zero.

Simultaneous/ Sequential: In simultaneous games both players move simultaneously, or if they do not move simultaneously, the second player is unaware of the first players' actions. In sequential games later players have some knowledge about earlier actions instead.

Perfect/ Imperfect information: A game is one of perfect information if all players know the moves previously made by all other players. Therefore, only sequential games can be games of perfect information because players in simultaneous games do not know the actions of the other players.

Now we know some of the existing types of games, let´s see the different strategies that a player can choose to play:

Pure strategy: It determines the move a player will make for any situation he or she could face.

Mixed strategy: It is an assignment of a probability to each pure strategy. This allows for a player to randomly select a pure strategy.

Totally mixed strategy: It is a mixed strategy in which the player assigns a strictly positive probability to every pure strategy.

Finally it is important to understand the concept of Nash Equilibrium.

Nash equilibrium: It is a solution of a non-cooperative game in which each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players, and no player has anything to gain by changing only his own strategy unilaterally.

Let´s have a look now at what it´s the best known example of games theory: The Prisoners Dilemma.

Two prisoners, there is no evidence to convict either one therefore the prosecutor seeks a confession. Each prisoner has two strategies:

-          Prisoner 1: Confess, no confess
-          Prisoner 2: Confess, no confess

It is known that strategies are chosen simultaneously by the two prisoners and with no communication between them.
Below you can see the matrix and the payoffs depending on the decisions made.

http://www.psychologyofgames.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/prisoners_dilemma.jpg


Here, regardless of what the other decides, each prisoner gets a higher pay-off by betraying the other. Prisoner A can state that no matter what prisoner B chooses, prisoner A is better defecting than cooperating. As a result, based on the payoffs above, prisoner A should logically betray prisoner B. The game is symmetric, so Prisoner B should act the same way. Since both rationally decide to defect, each receives a lower reward than if both were to stay quiet. That strategy results in both players being worse than if each have chosen to keep quiet at the cost of spending more time in jail himself.

There are plenty more examples you can check if you want to get more information about Game Theory. I encourage you to check the following links, where more information and examples are available:


 

No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario