Abstract

This paper compares two methodologies that have been used to understand the evolution of bargaining conventions. The first is the analytical approach that employs a standard learning dynamic and computes equilibria numerically. The second approach simulates an environment with a finite population of interacting agents. We compare these two approaches within the context of three variations on a common model. In one variation agents randomly experiment with different demands. A second variation posits assortative interactions, and the third allows for sophistication in agent strategies. The simulation results suggest that the agent-based approach performs well in selecting equilibria in most instances, but exact predicted population distributions often vary from those calculated numerically. Classification Numbers: C63, C73, C78.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call