25
1 a 1 A 1 a 2 a 3 A 2

MIxED sTraTegIES

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

MIxED sTraTegIES. A 1. a 3. A 2. a 1. a 2. 2.4 Mixed Strategies. When there is no saddle point: We’ll think of playing the game repeatedly. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: MIxED sTraTegIES

1

a 1A1

a2

a3A2

Page 2: MIxED sTraTegIES

2

2.4 Mixed Strategies• When there is no saddle point:• We’ll think of playing the game repeatedly.• We continue to assume that the players use the

same basic philosophy and principles as before (that is, to find the “safest” strategy that best protect yourself from loosing).

• However we now assume that the players can mix up the strategies that they use.

• Let Player I play strategy ai with probability xi and

• let Player II play strategy Aj with probability yj

Page 3: MIxED sTraTegIES

3

2.4 Mixed Strategies

Player II

Player I

Relative frequencyof application

Page 4: MIxED sTraTegIES

4

a1 x1

a2 x2

A1 A2

y1 y2

1 5

6 2⎡ ⎣ ⎢

⎤ ⎦ ⎥

• Since x1, x2, y1 and y2 are probabilities

• x1 + x2 = 1 and y1 + y2 = 1

• One possibility would be for Player I to use a1 3/4 of the time and a2 1/4 of the time whilst

• Player II to uses A1 1/2 of the time and A2 1/2 of the time.

• BUT, WHAT IS THE BEST COMBO ???

Example

Page 5: MIxED sTraTegIES

5

2.4.1 Definition• A mixed strategy for Player I is a vector

x = (x1,... ,xm) with xi ≥ 0 for all i and i xi = 1.

• Similarly, a mixed strategy for Player II is a vector

y = (y1,... ,yn) with yj ≥ 0 for all j and j yj = 1.

• A pure strategy is a vector x, where one component is 1 and all other components are 0.

eg. (0, 0, 1, 0, 0).

• So if a person uses a pure strategy they play the same option all the time. (This is what we do when there is a saddle.)

Page 6: MIxED sTraTegIES

6

Expected Payoff

• Let E(x,y) denote the expected value of the payoff to Player I given that she uses strategy x and Player II uses strategy y. By definition then,

• E(x,y) := i,j xi yj vij = xVy

• (Convention: in xVy, x is a row vector, y is a column vector, and V is a matrix.)

• If we play the game repeatedly many times Player 1 expects to get E(x, y) on average.

Page 7: MIxED sTraTegIES

7

2.4.2 Example

• No saddle.

• E(x,y) = xVy = (x1,x2) V (y1,y2)

= (x1, x2)(y1 + 5y2, 6y1 + 2y2)

= x1y1 + 5x1y2 + 6x2y1 + 2x2y2

• For x = (0.5, 0.5) we obtain

E(x,y) = 3.5(y1 + y2) = 3.5 for any y, since y1 + y2 = 1.

• Note that this is better than the optimal security level for Player I (equal to 2) !!!!

• BUT, CAN WE DO BETTER?

V =

1 5

6 2

È

Î Í

˘

˚ ˙

Page 8: MIxED sTraTegIES

8

• Similarly, if y = (0.5, 0.5), we have

E(x,y) = 3x1 + 4x2 < 4x1 + 4x2 = 4 (why?)

• Note that the optimal security level for Player II is equal to 5 (for pure strategies). Thus, this mixed strategy is (on average) superior to any pure strategy that Player II can use.

V =

1 5

6 2

È

Î Í

˘

˚ ˙

Page 9: MIxED sTraTegIES

9

Notation

• S := Set of feasible mixed strategies for Player I, ie.

S:={(x1,... ,xm): xi ≥ 0, i xi = 1}

• T:= Set of feasible mixed strategies for Player II, ie.

T:={(y1,... ,yn): yj ≥ 0, j yi = 1}

• Our aim is to choose “the best” of all the elements in S and T.

Page 10: MIxED sTraTegIES

10

2.4.3 Definition

• The security level of Player I associated with strategy x in S is the minimum feasible expected payoff to Player I given that she uses x (and that Player II is doing sensible things, that is, y in T). We denote the security level for Player I s(x), ie.

s(x):= min {E(x,y): y in T}.

Similarly, for Player II, let (y) denote the security level associated with strategy y in T, namely

(y):= max{E(x,y): x in S}.

Page 11: MIxED sTraTegIES

11

1.4.1 Theorem

• There exists the following equalities:

s(x) = min{xV.j : j=1,2,...,n} and

(y) = max{Vi . y : i=1,2,...,m}

• In words, if Player I is using a given strategy x, Player II can restrict herself to pure strategies !!!!

• If Player II is using a given strategy y, Player I can restrict himself to pure strategies!!!

• An LP-based proof

• (See Lecture Notes for an alternative direct proof. )

Page 12: MIxED sTraTegIES

12

LP based Proof• Since by definition E(x,y) = xVy, we have s(x) = min {xVy: y in T}Let c: = xV, then s(x) = min {cy : y in T}

= min {cy: y1 + ... + yn = 1, yj ≥ 0 }This is a LP problem with one functional

constraint. Thus, a basic feasible solution is of the form y=(0, 0, ..., 0, 1, 0, 0, ... 0), which is in fact a pure strategy!

• Similarly for (y).• Q: What is the value of j for which yj = 1 ?• A: The j that has the least cj value!

Page 13: MIxED sTraTegIES

13

2.4.5 Definition

• The optimal security level for Player I is equal to

• v1 := max {s(x): x in S}

• and the optimal security level for Player II is equal to

• v2 := min {(y): y in T}

• If v1 = v2 we call the common quantity the value of the game.

Page 14: MIxED sTraTegIES

14

Example 2.4.2 (Continued)

• v1 = max {s(x): x in S}

= max { min{xV.j : j = 1,2,...,n}: x in S} (using Theorem 1.4.1)

= max {min{xV.1, xV.2}: x in S}

= max {min{x1 + 6x2, 5x1 + 2x2} x in S}

= max {min{x1 + 6 – 6x1, 5x1 + 2 – 2x1}: 0 ≤ x1 ≤ 1}

(using x1 + x2 = 1 )

= max {min{–5x1 + 6, 3x1 + 2}: 0 ≤ x1 ≤ 1}

V =

1 5

6 2

È

Î Í

˘

˚ ˙

Page 15: MIxED sTraTegIES

15

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

3 x1 + 2

x1

–5x1 + 6

Page 16: MIxED sTraTegIES

16

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

–5 x1 + 6 3 x1 + 2

x1

minimum of the two lines

Page 17: MIxED sTraTegIES

17

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

– 5 x1 + 6 3x1 + 2

x1

• maximum of the minimum function here

Page 18: MIxED sTraTegIES

18

•v1 = max {min{–5x1 + 6, 3x1 + 2}: 0 ≤ x1 ≤ 1}.x*1 = 1/2; x*2 = 1 – x*1 = 1/2; v1 = 3x*1 + 2 = 7/2.

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

–5x1 + 6 3x1 + 2

x1

Page 19: MIxED sTraTegIES

19

For Player II

• v2 = min{(y): y in T}

• = min{ max {Vi . y: i = 1,...,m}: y in T}

• = min { max {y1 + 5y2 , 6y1 + 2y2}: y in T}

• = min { max {–4y1 + 5, 4y1 + 2}: 0 ≤ y1 ≤ 1}

Page 20: MIxED sTraTegIES

20

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

–4y1 + 5 4y1 + 2

y1

Page 21: MIxED sTraTegIES

21

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

–4y1 + 54y1 + 2

y1

Max of two lines

Page 22: MIxED sTraTegIES

22

01

23

4

5

6

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1

–4y1 + 5 4y1 + 2

y1

• v2= min { max {–4y1 + 5, 4y1 + 2}:0 ≤ y1 ≤ 1}

y*1 = 3/8; y*2 = 1 – y*1 = 5/8; v2=7/2.

Min of max function

Page 23: MIxED sTraTegIES

23

Is this solution stable?• Let us see if Player I is happy with x* given that

Player II is using y*.

• For any feasible strategy x for Player I we thus have:

• xVy* = (7/2)(x1 + x2) = 7/2 for all x in S.

• Thus, given that Player II is using y*, Player I will be happy with x*, in fact she will be as happy with any feasible strategy.

• Convince yourself that Player II is happy with y* given that Player I is using x*.

Page 24: MIxED sTraTegIES

24

1.4.4 Definition

• A strategy pair (x*,y*) in S T is said to be in equilibrium if

xVy* ≤ x*Vy* ≤ x*Vy for all (x,y) in S T.

• Fundamental questions:

• Do we always have such pairs?

• How do we construct such pairs if they exist?

Page 25: MIxED sTraTegIES

25

Example

• Solve the two person zero sum game whose payoff matrix is

• See lecture for solution.

−1 3

2 1

⎛ ⎝ ⎜ ⎞