--%>
Assignment Help - homework help

Problem regarding to zero sum games

Making a bet within an office pool on this year’s Kentucky Derby is an illustration of a: (w) positive-sum game. (x) negative-sum game. (y) zero-sum game. (z) tit-for-tat game.

Can anybody suggest me the proper explanation for given problem regarding Economics generally?

   Related Questions in Game Theory

  • Q : Tit-for-Tat behavior The tit-for-tat

    The tit-for-tat behavior that frequently emerges in an infinitely repeated game may be summarized as do unto others like: (w) they most recently did unto you. (x) you would have them do unto you. (y) before they do unto you. (z) they have ever done un

    		•
  • Q : Illustration of Nash equilibrium As per

    As per this payoff matrix in demonstrated figure, Alyssa going to the football game when Ben attended the play cannot be Nash equilibrium since: (w) they’d each gain the most possible when Ben watched football when Alyssa went to the play. (x) b

    		•
  • Q : Repeating game in Nash equilibrium In

    In Nash equilibrium for a repeating game, there the participants: (i) share potential gains in proportion to the relative sizes of the two parties. (ii) are harmed by the prisoners’ dilemma. (iii) have both adopted their respective dominant posi

    		•
  • Q : Result of prisoners’ dilemma game When

    When Car Jacker knows about that Cat Burglar has connections inside the prison and will have him killed when he implicates Cat Burglar, the probable result of this prisoners’ dilemma game is that: (i) neither prisoner squeals and they each serve

    		•
  • Q : Example of positive sum games Happy

    Happy marriages are illustrations of: (i) mutual independence. (ii) specialization according to comparative advantage. (iii) positive sum games. (iv) the prisoners’ dilemma. (v) first mover advantages. I need a good answer on

    		•
  • Q : Dominant strategies of Prisoners’

    The District Attorney has Car Jacker as well as Cat Burglar nailed for possession of stolen goods after a long crime spree. Now the DA separately offers them the options in this pay-off matrix. When these offers operate only once as well as both of them follow their <

    		•
  • Q : Strategies of companies for Nash

    In this payoff matrix for the location strategies of companies: (w) BEST will choose to go to location 1 and ACE will choose to go to location 2. (x) BEST will choose to go to location 2 and ACE will choose to go to location 1. (y) there is no Nash equilibrium. (z) th

    		•
  • Q : Tit-for-Tat in Dynamic Games Assume

    Assume that Kevin and Margeaux play a repeated game in that they can choose to act either cooperatively or non cooperatively. When on the third round, Kevin reacts cooperatively and Margeaux react uncooperatively: (1) and both use tit-for-tat strategy

    		•
  • Q : Dominant strategies ACE and BEST are

    ACE and BEST are the only two grocery stores into a remote small town within North Dakota. The owners as each other very small, and trust each other even less. When they cooperate the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice will never know. Specified this

    		•
  • Q : Competitive prices and efficiency and

    When all industries were purely competitive and externalities were not present and when the distribution of income was viewed as fair by consensus of the population, in that case the marginal value to society of an extra unit of a goo

    		•