Ірраціональні стратегії в умовах часткової інформованості гравців на прикладі індивідуально-оптимальних рівноваг
Вантажиться...
Файли
Дата
2019
Автори
Назва журналу
Номер ISSN
Назва тому
Видавець
Університет імені Альфреда Нобеля
Анотація
The most attractive concepts of optimality in the conditions of full knowledge of players are the
principles of optimality by Pareto and Nash. Pareto’s concept of optimality is based on the idea of
cooperative behavior of players when they collectively choose their strategies and take into account the
benefits of a win. Therefore, there are no situations that will be better for all players than Pareto-optimal
at the same time. The solution of the problems of game theory only by classical methods is incomplete,
since, along with the classical methods of non-cooperative game theory, such as the equilibrium for
Nash and Pareto, there are other methods. Some of them are irrational, for example, the principles
of individual optimality. The principle of individual optimality, gives each player the opportunity
to choose their strategies individually (non-cooperative), but to take into account the interests of all
other players (a compromise for resolving the conflict). This principle is grounded in so-called onegoal games, where all players have a goal-one, but it is characterized by each player’s own win-win
function. Ideally, this goal is to select players their strategies so that the best situation for all players
is formed. Since such situations may not exist, players can agree on a compromise for a common
purpose. The paper considers methods of non-operational theory of the game on the example of the
neoclassical model of equilibrium of goods in a limited market between a fixed number of economic
agents. The methods of “cursing the Cournot” and the principle of individual optimality are described.
The difference between concepts is demonstrated: solved the problem with the principle of individual
optimality and compares the results with the solution of this problem in two other cases. The principle
of individual optimality allows each player to choose their strategy individually (noncooperative) but
taken into account in the interests of all other players (for a compromise solution to the conflict).
This principle is grounded in so-called one-goal games, where all players have a goal-one, but it is
characterized by each player’s own win-win function. For example, when building a house there is
an organization contractor and the organization of subcontracting. The contractor has the purpose,
having spent a certain amount of money, to get the best result, and the subcontractor has the purpose of
performing the task so that the contractor has a sufficient minimum amount of money spent. Although
in both of them, the only purpose – the construction of buildings – is a win-win function for everyone,
which is characterized by a compromise between them. Ideally, this goal is to select players their
strategies so that the best situation for all players is formed. Since such situations may not exist, players
can agree on a compromise for a common purpose. In terms of rationality, a compromise is not a direct
maximization of their needs, therefore it is necessary to check whether such irrational behavior can
have its advantages.
Опис
Ключові слова
behavioral economics, classical theories, game theory, Pareto optimality, individually optimal equilibrium, Nash equilibrium.