Learning in “Do-It-Yourself Lottery” with Full Information: A Computational Study

We study the kind of dynamics players using a belief-based learning model lead to in Barrow’s “do-it-yourself lottery” by an agent-based computational economics approach. The lottery is that players choose a positive integer that is expected to be the smallest, but no one else chooses. For this purpose, we consider a simple game form in which every player knows all players’ submissions at the time of their decision making. We use computer simulations to change the game setup and the parameters of the learning model. Our main findings are twofold: First, the distributions of the submitted and winning integers are different from those in equilibrium in many cases. Second, the game patterns are contingent upon the two parameters in the learning model and the game setup itself: While a lower-sensitivity parameter value often leads to a somewhat randomized behavior, in the case of a higher-sensitivity parameter, the collective behavior is either a single pattern or plural ones.

[1]  J. Barrow 100 Essential Things You Didn't Know You Didn't Know: Math Explains Your World , 2008 .

[2]  E. Hopkins Two Competing Models of How People Learn in Games (first version) , 1999 .

[3]  Daniel Friedman,et al.  Individual Learning in Normal Form Games: Some Laboratory Results☆☆☆ , 1997 .

[4]  C. Plott,et al.  Handbook of Experimental Economics Results , 2008 .

[5]  A. Schotter,et al.  An Experimental Study of Belief Learning Using Elicited Beliefs , 2002 .

[6]  Thomas Brenner,et al.  Agent Learning Representation - Advice in Modelling Economic Learning , 2004 .

[7]  Yi-Cheng Zhang,et al.  Emergence of cooperation and organization in an evolutionary game , 1997 .

[8]  Takao Terano,et al.  A simple strategy experiment in Barrow's "do-it-yourself lottery" , 2010 .

[9]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  The Theory of Learning in Games , 1998 .

[10]  K. Judd Computationally Intensive Analyses in Economics , 2006 .

[11]  Alan W. Beggs,et al.  On the convergence of reinforcement learning , 2005, J. Econ. Theory.

[12]  Yicheng Zhang,et al.  On the minority game: Analytical and numerical studies , 1998, cond-mat/9805084.

[13]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Testing Game Theory in the Field: Swedish LUPI Lottery Games , 2010 .

[14]  John Duffy,et al.  Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments , 2004 .

[15]  Colin Camerer Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction , 2003 .

[16]  Peter Winkler Mathematical Puzzles: A Connoisseur's Collection , 2003 .

[17]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Iterated Dominance and Iterated Best-Response in Experimental P-Beauty Contests , 1998 .

[18]  Giovanna Devetag,et al.  A laboratory experiment on the minority game , 2003 .

[19]  R. Nagel Experimental Beauty Contest Games: Levels of Reasoning and Convergence to Equilibrium , 2008 .

[20]  Leigh Tesfatsion,et al.  Handbook of Computational Economics, Volume 2: Agent-Based Computational Economics (Handbook of Computational Economics) , 2006 .

[21]  R. Nagel Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study , 1995 .

[22]  John Duffy,et al.  On the Robustness of Behaviour in Experimental ‘Beauty Contest’ Games , 1997 .

[23]  J. Jordan Three Problems in Learning Mixed-Strategy Nash Equilibria , 1993 .

[24]  Nicolaas J. Vriend ACE MODELS OF ENDOGENOUS INTERACTIONS , 2006 .