본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

game-theory

Analyze strategic interactions in markets, including firm entry, pricing, auctions, and bargaining. Guides equilibrium selection and computation, explains how to handle multiple possible outcomes, and helps assess whether data can identify the model's parameters.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

This skill covers game-theoretic methods in structural econometrics and industrial organization. Use when the user is working with strategic interactions, equilibrium analysis, or game-theoretic structural models — including entry games, conduct testing, auction models with strategic bidding, bargaining, or matching markets. Triggers on "Nash equilibrium", "subgame perfect", "best response", "strategic interaction", "entry game", "conduct testing", "auction", "mechanism design", "matching market", "bargaining", "BNE", "Bayesian Nash", "static game", "dynamic game", "repeated game", "multiple equilibria", "equilibrium selection", "discrete game", "oligopoly", "game-theoretic", "player", "payoff", "strategy", "dominant strategy", "Bresnahan-Reiss", "Ciliberto-Tamer", "partial identification", "set identification", or markup test.

실행 점수 미검증

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Choosing and computing an equilibrium
  • Planning an analysis of firm entry or price competition
  • Handling multiple equilibria in empirical models
  • Assessing assumptions in auction or bargaining models

포함된 파일(7)

  • SKILL.md14.5 KB
  • references/equilibrium-computation.md6.2 KB
  • references/equilibrium-concepts.md4.5 KB
  • references/estimation-diagnostics.md10.1 KB
  • references/identification-in-games.md3.2 KB
  • references/io-applications.md16.2 KB
  • references/multiple-equilibria.md3.6 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Game Theory

Reference for game-theoretic methods in applied structural econometrics and industrial organization. Covers equilibrium concepts, computational methods, structural IO applications, and the identification challenges unique to game-theoretic models.

When to Use This Skill

Use when the user is:

  • Estimating a structural model where agents interact strategically (oligopoly, entry, bargaining, auctions)
  • Deriving or computing Nash equilibria, BNE, or subgame perfect equilibria
  • Handling the multiple equilibria problem in empirical games
  • Testing firm conduct (competitive vs. collusive vs. oligopolistic)
  • Estimating entry models, matching models, or bargaining models
  • Formalizing an identification argument for a game-theoretic model

Skip when:

  • The model is single-agent (use structural-modeling skill for dynamic discrete choice, demand estimation)
  • The task is standard causal inference without strategic interaction (use causal-inference skill)
  • The game is a well-known IO model with standard estimation code (pyblp covers BLP demand; see structural-modeling)

Quick reference only — for full implementation code, see references/ subdirectory.

Where to Start

  • Choosing equilibrium concept? See Equilibrium Concept Routing below, then references/equilibrium-concepts.md for definitions and formulas
  • Computing equilibria? See references/equilibrium-computation.md
  • Estimating an IO model? See references/io-applications.md
  • Estimation code and diagnostics? See references/estimation-diagnostics.md
  • Facing multiple equilibria? See Multiple Equilibria Summary below, then references/multiple-equilibria.md for selection rules and set identification
  • Identification argument? See Identification Summary below, then references/identification-in-games.md for exclusion restrictions and rank conditions

Quick Start: Nash Equilibrium Computation

import nashpy as nash
import numpy as np

# Define a 2-player game: row player payoffs A, column player payoffs B
A = np.array([[3, 0], [5, 1]])  # e.g., Prisoner's Dilemma
B = A.T                          # Symmetric game
game = nash.Game(A, B)

# Find ALL Nash equilibria via support enumeration
for i, (sr, sc) in enumerate(game.support_enumeration()):
    print(f"NE {i+1}: row={sr.round(3)}, col={sc.round(3)}")

For larger games, extensive-form games, or QRE computation, see references/equilibrium-computation.md.

Equilibrium Concept Routing

Information StructureTimingConceptRefinementKey Reference
CompleteSimultaneousNash equilibriumDominant strategy, trembling-hand perfect—
CompleteSequentialSubgame perfect equilibrium (SPE)Backward induction—
CompleteRepeatedSPE with trigger strategiesFolk theorem, Nash reversionGreen-Porter (1984)
CompleteDynamic (states)Markov perfect equilibrium (MPE)Strategies depend only on payoff-relevant stateEricson-Pakes (1995)
Incomplete (private types)SimultaneousBayesian Nash equilibrium (BNE)Monotone strategies, threshold equilibria—
IncompleteSequentialPerfect Bayesian equilibrium (PBE)Sequential rationality + Bayesian updatingKreps-Wilson

Decision tree:

  1. Do players have private information? → Yes: BNE framework. No: Nash/SPE.
  2. Is the game sequential? → Yes: SPE (backward induction) or MPE (dynamic states). No: simultaneous Nash.
  3. Is the game repeated? → Yes: folk theorem applies; collusion may be sustainable.
  4. Are there multiple equilibria? → See Multiple Equilibria Summary.

For detailed definitions, formulas, and the complete-vs-incomplete information comparison table, see references/equilibrium-concepts.md.


Multiple Equilibria Summary

The central identification challenge in empirical games. Three resolution strategies:

StrategyApproachTrade-offKey Reference
Impose selection ruleOrder firms by profitability; pick unique NEPoint identification, but selection rule is an assumptionBerry (1992)
Set identificationAccept all NE-consistent parametersNo selection assumption, but wider confidence regionsCiliberto-Tamer (2009)
Exploit multiplicityUse correlates of equilibrium selection as instrumentsPoint identification with weaker assumptionsSweeting (2009)
QREBounded rationality generates unique equilibriumTestable, but imposes logistic choice structureMcKelvey-Palfrey

For the full selection rule comparison table, QRE implementation code, and Ciliberto-Tamer bounds procedure, see references/multiple-equilibria.md.


Identification Summary

Two sources of endogeneity distinguish games from single-agent models: (1) strategic complementarities/substitutes create simultaneity, and (2) correlated unobservables create spurious correlation in actions.

Resolution: Firm-specific instruments Z_i (cost, distance, regulatory history) excluded from rival j's profit equation. Variation in Z_i shifts firm i's entry, which instruments for j's strategic response.

Rank condition (Bajari-Hong-Ryan 2010): The Jacobian of the best-response system w.r.t. exogenous variables must have full rank. Fails when all firms share the same instruments, competitive effects are zero, or instruments are weak.

Conduct parameter identification: Cost shifters must shift supply independently of demand (standard simultaneous equations condition). The conduct parameter θ is identified from the curvature of the markup-quantity relationship.

For the full treatment — exclusion restriction formulas, two-step estimation logic, competitive effect identification, and conduct rank condition failure modes — see references/identification-in-games.md.


Structural IO Applications: Routing

For full model specifications, estimation code, and references, see references/io-applications.md and references/estimation-diagnostics.md.

ApplicationModel ClassEstimationReference File
Market structure (symmetric firms)Bresnahan-Reiss ordered probitMLEio-applications.md
Entry (asymmetric firms)Berry ordered equilibriumMLE with equilibrium constraintsio-applications.md
Entry (multiple equilibria)Ciliberto-Tamer partial identificationMoment inequalitiesio-applications.md
Conduct testingBLP supply side + markup equationGMM + Rivers-Vuong testio-applications.md
Vertical bargainingGeneralized Nash bargaining (Horn-Wolinsky)GMM with outside option instrumentsio-applications.md
Procurement/first-price auctionsBNE bidding + GPV inversionNonparametricio-applications.md
Dynamic oligopolyMPE (Ericson-Pakes)CCP two-step (Bajari-Benkard-Levin)estimation-diagnostics.md
Collusion sustainabilityRepeated game + trigger strategiesThreshold discount factorequilibrium-concepts.md

Integration with compound-science

  • Use identification-critic agent to verify equilibrium existence, uniqueness, and stability properties before reporting results
  • Use structural-modeling skill for the estimation machinery (GMM, MLE, NFXP, MPEC) when the game-theoretic structure is already set up
  • Use identification-critic agent to stress-test the game-theoretic identification argument — exclusion restrictions, rank conditions, separability assumptions
  • Use the identification-critic agent (or identification-proofs skill) to formalize the full identification argument: target parameter → model → equilibrium concept → moment conditions → rank condition
  • Use numerical-auditor agent to design Monte Carlo studies verifying identification and estimator performance in your specific game

Common Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternProblemBetter Approach
Assuming unique equilibrium without verificationModel may have multiple equilibria; point estimates are identification-assumption-dependentEnumerate all Nash equilibria at estimated parameters; verify uniqueness or state selection rule
Using complete-information entry model when firms have private informationEquilibrium concept is wrong; identification failsUse incomplete-information model (Seim 2006, Bajari-Hong-Ryan 2010) or test for information structure
Ignoring the multiple equilibria problem in partial identificationInference is invalid under point identification when set identification is requiredUse Ciliberto-Tamer bounds or impose and justify a selection rule
Conduct test with weak instrumentsLow power to reject Bertrand; cannot distinguish conductReport first-stage relevance; use optimal instruments (BLP supply side)
Treating equilibrium prices as exogenous regressors in demandPrices are endogenous (set in equilibrium); OLS demand estimates are biasedInstrument with cost shifters; use BLP/IV approach
Estimating bargaining weight without outside option variationβ is not identified without variation in outside optionsFind instruments for outside options (market-level variation in alternatives)
Nash reversion assumption in collusion test without threshold testAssumes away the inference problemEstimate threshold discount factor; test whether δ* is plausible given observed interest rates
Not reporting equilibrium verificationReferees cannot assess model validityAlways report that estimated parameters support equilibrium existence

Method Selection Guide

SettingModelEquilibrium ConceptEstimation ApproachKey Reference
Oligopoly market structureComplete information entryNash (ordered selection)Ordered probit MLEBresnahan-Reiss (1991)
Asymmetric firm entryComplete information entryNash (ordered selection)MLE with equilibrium constraintsBerry (1992)
Entry with multiple equilibriaPartial identificationNash (all equilibria)Moment inequalitiesCiliberto-Tamer (2009)
Entry with private cost infoBayesian gameBayesian Nash (threshold)MLE / two-stepSeim (2006)
Conduct: competitive vs. collusiveOligopoly pricingNash in prices/quantitiesBLP supply + Rivers-Vuong testBerry-Levinsohn-Pakes (1995)
Vertical bargainingNash bargainingGeneralized Nash solutionGMM with outside option instrumentsHorn-Wolinsky (1988), Crawford-Yurukoglu (2012)
Procurement auctionsFirst-price sealed-bidBayesian Nash (bidding)GPV nonparametric inversionGuerre-Perrigne-Vuong (2000)
Takeover/merger auctionsAscending auctionDominant strategy (IPV)Order statistics / MLEAthey-Haile (2002)
Common value auctionsAffiliated valuesBNE (affiliated)Parametric MLELi-Perrigne-Vuong (2002)
Dynamic oligopolyMarkov perfect equilibriumMPECCP two-step (Bajari-Benkard-Levin)Pakes-McGuire (1994), Bajari et al. (2007)
Collusion sustainabilityRepeated gameSubgame perfectThreshold discount factor estimationGreen-Porter (1984), Porter (1983)
Matching marketsStable matchingStable (Gale-Shapley)Revealed preference from match outcomesFox (2010), Choo-Siow (2006)
Small 2-player game (theory)Normal formNash (all equilibria)nashpy / gambit computation—

Decision heuristic:

  1. Is the game static or dynamic?
    • Dynamic → Markov perfect equilibrium; use CCP two-step (Bajari-Benkard-Levin 2007)
    • Static → proceed below
  2. Is information complete or incomplete?
    • Incomplete (private types) → BNE; use threshold strategy estimation or GPV for auctions
    • Complete → Nash equilibrium; proceed below
  3. Are there multiple equilibria at plausible parameter values?
    • Yes, and willing to impose selection → ordered probit / Berry (1992)
    • Yes, and not willing to impose selection → moment inequalities / Ciliberto-Tamer (2009)
    • No → standard MLE or GMM
  4. Is the question about conduct?
    • Use BLP supply side + Rivers-Vuong test, or Rotemberg-Saloner markup test
  5. Is bargaining the mechanism?
    • Use generalized Nash bargaining with outside option instruments

Reference Files

Read these when implementing a specific model type:

  • references/equilibrium-concepts.md — Detailed definitions and formulas for Nash, BNE, SPE, MPE, mixed strategies, repeated games, folk theorem, complete-vs-incomplete information comparison
  • references/equilibrium-computation.md — Computing Nash, BNE, and SPE: best response iteration, support enumeration, Gambit solver integration, linear complementarity, dynamic programming
  • references/multiple-equilibria.md — Selection rules (risk dominance, QRE, ordered equilibrium), QRE implementation code, Ciliberto-Tamer set identification procedure, multiplicity-as-variation
  • references/identification-in-games.md — Exclusion restrictions, rank conditions (Bajari-Hong-Ryan), two-step estimation logic, competitive effect identification, conduct parameter identification and failure modes
  • references/io-applications.md — Entry models (Bresnahan-Reiss, Berry, Ciliberto-Tamer), conduct testing (BLP supply, Rivers-Vuong), bargaining (Nash, Rubinstein), auction foundations
  • references/estimation-diagnostics.md — Estimation code (MLE, two-step, MPEC, moment inequalities), convergence diagnostics, model fit tests, equilibrium verification

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

a1

무료

Turn a broad research idea into clear, testable questions. Compare familiar and less conventional approaches, structure the selected question around its population and methods, and assess variables, feasibility, and potential theoretical contributions.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Turn a research topic into testable questions
  • Narrow an overly broad research question
  • Compare alternative research angles
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a2

무료

Helps build a research framework by comparing theories, mapping relationships between variables, and deriving testable hypotheses. Explores less conventional options, examines weaknesses and competing explanations, and produces diagrams with anticipated reviewer objections.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Comparing theories for a research question
  • Deriving hypotheses from relationships between variables
  • Examining weaknesses and anticipated reviewer objections
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

a5

무료

Clarify the philosophical assumptions behind a research project and check whether they fit the proposed methods. Get a reasoned research stance, draft proposal wording, and guidance for explaining how the researcher's background and values shape the study.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Clarifying philosophical foundations for a research proposal
  • Explaining why the chosen research methods fit the study
  • Drafting a statement about the researcher's position
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Plan and draft academic papers through specialized agent roles covering literature, arguments, citations, and review. Get chapter guidance, revision roadmaps, Traditional Chinese and English abstracts, and documents formatted as LaTeX, DOCX, PDF, or Markdown.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Planning a paper chapter by chapter
  • Drafting a paper from research materials
  • Turning reviewer comments into a revision roadmap
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Turn a detailed outline into a philosophy or interdisciplinary manuscript. Draft chapters with repeated quality reviews, check terminology and arguments across sections, and prepare the manuscript, evaluation reports, abstract, and metadata for submission.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Draft a full paper from a detailed outline
  • Review argument and citation quality chapter by chapter
  • Check terminology and argument flow across chapters
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

Simulate academic peer review through five reviewer roles tailored to the paper's field. Receive separate critiques, an editorial decision, and a prioritized revision roadmap, or check whether a revised manuscript addresses earlier comments.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Review a manuscript before journal submission
  • Examine research methods and statistical validity
  • Challenge core arguments and alternative explanations
brycewang-stanford/Auto-Empirical-Research-Skills4.7천2026년 10월 20일 업데이트

brycewang-stanford의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고