IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joptap/v137y2008i2d10.1007_s10957-007-9333-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probabilities of Pure Nash Equilibria in Matrix Games when the Payoff Entries of One Player Are Randomly Selected

Author

Listed:
  • J. M. Peterson

    (University of Pittsburgh)

  • M. A. Simaan

    (University of Pittsburgh)

Abstract

The Nash equilibrium in pure strategies represents an important solution concept in nonzero sum matrix games. Existence of Nash equilibria in games with known and with randomly selected payoff entries have been studied extensively. In many real games, however, a player may know his own payoff entries but not the payoff entries of the other player. In this paper, we consider nonzero sum matrix games where the payoff entries of one player are known, but the payoff entries of the other player are assumed to be randomly selected. We are interested in determining the probabilities of existence of pure Nash equilibria in such games. We characterize these probabilities by first determining the finite space of ordinal matrix games that corresponds to the infinite space of matrix games with random entries for only one player. We then partition this space into mutually exclusive spaces that correspond to games with no Nash equilibria and with r Nash equilibria. In order to effectively compute the sizes of these spaces, we introduce the concept of top-rated preferences minimal ordinal games. We then present a theorem which provides a mechanism for computing the number of games in each of these mutually exclusive spaces, which then can be used to determine the probabilities. Finally, we summarize the results by deriving the probabilities of existence of unique, nonunique, and no Nash equilibria, and we present an illustrative example.

Suggested Citation

  • J. M. Peterson & M. A. Simaan, 2008. "Probabilities of Pure Nash Equilibria in Matrix Games when the Payoff Entries of One Player Are Randomly Selected," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 401-410, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joptap:v:137:y:2008:i:2:d:10.1007_s10957-007-9333-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10957-007-9333-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10957-007-9333-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10957-007-9333-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. B. Cruz & M. A. Simaan, 2000. "Ordinal Games and Generalized Nash and Stackelberg Solutions," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 107(2), pages 205-222, November.
    2. S. Mishra & T. K. Kumar, 1997. "On the Probability of Existence of Pure Equilibria in Matrix Games," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 765-770, September.
    3. Powers, Imelda Yeung, 1990. "Limiting Distributions of the Number of Pure Strategy Nash Equilibria in N-Person Games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 19(3), pages 277-286.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ben Amiet & Andrea Collevecchio & Marco Scarsini & Ziwen Zhong, 2021. "Pure Nash Equilibria and Best-Response Dynamics in Random Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(4), pages 1552-1572, November.
    2. McLennan, Andrew & Park, In-Uck, 1999. "Generic 4 x 4 Two Person Games Have at Most 15 Nash Equilibria," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 111-130, January.
    3. Stanford, William, 1999. "On the number of pure strategy Nash equilibria in finite common payoffs games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 29-34, January.
    4. Jamal Ouenniche & Aristotelis Boukouras & Mohammad Rajabi, 2016. "An Ordinal Game Theory Approach to the Analysis and Selection of Partners in Public–Private Partnership Projects," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 314-343, April.
    5. Thomas Quint & Martin Shubik, 1994. "On the Number of Nash Equilibria in a Bimatrix Game," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1089, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. McLennan, Andrew & Berg, Johannes, 2005. "Asymptotic expected number of Nash equilibria of two-player normal form games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 264-295, May.
    7. Stanford, William, 2004. "Individually rational pure strategies in large games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 221-233, April.
    8. Stanford, William, 2010. "The number of pure strategy Nash equilibria in random multi-team games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 108(3), pages 352-354, September.
    9. Arieli, Itai & Babichenko, Yakov, 2016. "Random extensive form games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 517-535.
    10. M. Wei & J. B. Cruz, 2006. "Two Game Models for Cooperation with Implicit Noncooperation," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 130(3), pages 505-527, September.
    11. Stanford, William, 1997. "On the distribution of pure strategy equilibria in finite games with vector payoffs," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 115-127, April.
    12. Michael R. Powers & Martin Shubik & Wen Wang, 2016. "Expected Worth for 2 � 2 Matrix Games with Variable Grid Sizes," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2039, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    13. Samuel C. Wiese & Torsten Heinrich, 2020. "The Frequency of Convergent Games under Best-Response Dynamics," Papers 2011.01052, arXiv.org.
    14. Rinott, Yosef & Scarsini, Marco, 2000. "On the Number of Pure Strategy Nash Equilibria in Random Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 274-293, November.
    15. Tom Johnston & Michael Savery & Alex Scott & Bassel Tarbush, 2023. "Game Connectivity and Adaptive Dynamics," Papers 2309.10609, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    16. Heinrich, Torsten & Wiese, Samuel, 2020. "The Frequency of Convergent Games under Best-Response Dynamics," INET Oxford Working Papers 2020-24, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    17. S. Mishra & T. K. Kumar, 1997. "On the Probability of Existence of Pure Equilibria in Matrix Games," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 765-770, September.
    18. Naouel Yousfi-Halimi & Mohammed Said Radjef & Hachem Slimani, 2018. "Refinement of pure Pareto Nash equilibria in finite multicriteria games using preference relations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 607-628, August.
    19. Torsten Heinrich & Yoojin Jang & Luca Mungo & Marco Pangallo & Alex Scott & Bassel Tarbush & Samuel Wiese, 2021. "Best-response dynamics, playing sequences, and convergence to equilibrium in random games," Papers 2101.04222, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2022.
    20. Pangallo, Marco & Heinrich, Torsten & Jang, Yoojin & Scott, Alex & Tarbush, Bassel & Wiese, Samuel & Mungo, Luca, 2021. "Best-Response Dynamics, Playing Sequences, And Convergence To Equilibrium In Random Games," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-23, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joptap:v:137:y:2008:i:2:d:10.1007_s10957-007-9333-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.