Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Equilibrium Concepts for Social Interaction Models

2003, International Game Theory Review

https://doi.org/10.1142/S021919890300101X

Abstract

This paper describes the relationship between two different binary choice social interaction models. The Brock and Durlauf (2001) model is essentially a static Nash equilibrium model with random utility preferences. In the Blume (forthcoming) model is a population game model similar to , and . We show that the equilibria of the Brock-Durlauf model are steady states of a differential equation which is a deterministic approximation of the sample-path behavior of Blume's model. Moreover, the limit distribution of this model clusters around a subset of the steady states when the population is large.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What explains the connection between the Nash equilibrium and the strategy adjustment model?add

The paper reveals that the steady states of the differential equation correspond to the equilibria of the static Nash model, indicating a deep relationship between dynamic adjustments and Nash equilibria.

How do asymptotic behaviors relate to population interaction models?add

The analysis demonstrates that large populations display invariant distributions clustering around stable equilibria, suggesting population processes tend to stable states as they grow.

What differentiates individual interactions in economic models from traditional models?add

The study highlights that in interactions-based models, individual decisions include a random component driven by bounded rationality rather than being strictly deterministic, allowing for randomness in actor behavior.

What characterizes the convergence of invariant distributions in population processes?add

The findings show that for large populations, invariant distributions weakly converge to states characterized by the maxima of a defined function, impacting equilibrium stability and selection.

When do multiple equilibria occur in interdependent preference models?add

The presence of positive conformity effects can lead to multiple equilibria, as demonstrated through various equilibrium conditions dependent on individual utility components and interaction probabilities.

References (9)

  1. Benaim, M., and J. Weibull (2000): "Deterministic Approximation of Stochastic Evolution in Games," unpublished working paper, The Re- search Institute of Industrial Economics, Stockholm.
  2. Binmore, K., L. Samuelson, and R. Vaughn (1995): "Musical Chairs: Modeling Noisy Evolution," Games and Economic Behavior, 11, 1-35.
  3. Blume, L. E. (1993): "The Statistical Mechanics of Strategic Interaction," Games and Economic Behavior, 4, 387-424. (1997): "Population Games," in The Economy as an Complex Adap- tive System II, ed. by W. B. Arthur, D. Lane, and S. Durlauf. Addison- Wesley, Redwood City:. (forthcoming): "How Noise Matters," Games and Economic Be- havior.
  4. Brock, W., and S. Durlauf (2000): "Interactions Based Models," in Handbook of Econometrics, ed. by J. Heckman, and E. Leamer. North Holland, Amsterdam. (2001): "Discrete Choice with Social Interactions," Review of Eco- nomic Studies, 59, 235-260.
  5. Ellison, G. (1993): "Learning, Local Interaction and Coordination," Econometrica, 61, 1047-1072.
  6. Ethier, S. N., and T. G. Kurtz (1986): Markov Processes: Characteri- zation and Convergence. Wiley-Interscience, New York.
  7. Glaeser, E., B. Sacerdote, and J. Scheinkman (1996): "Crime and Social Interactions," Quarterly Journal of Economics, CXI, 507-548.
  8. Kandori, M., G. Mailath, and R. Rob (1993): "Learning, Mutation and Long Run Equilibrium in Games," Econometrica, 61, 29-56.
  9. Young, H. P. (1993): "The Evolution of Conventions," Econometrica, 61, 57-84.