A Nash equilibrium is a strategy profile in which no player can increase their expected payoff by changing only their own strategy.
A finite nondegenerate bimatrix game has a finite odd number of Nash equilibria. After shifting to positive payoffs, fully labelled vertex pairs in the bounded best-response polytopes correspond to equilibria plus one artificial zero pair. Dropping a fixed label gives a finite path graph whose endpoints are exactly these pairs. The number of endpoints is even, leaving an odd number of genuine equilibria. This is the endpoint-parity argument underlying the Lemke-Howson algorithm.
A symmetric equilibrium of a symmetric game has every player use the same strategy or the same distribution of strategies. Symmetry between players does not require identical behavior across contests with different prizes.
In a nondegenerate symmetric bimatrix game, player interchange pairs every nonsymmetric Nash equilibrium with a distinct swapped equilibrium. The equilibrium oddness theorem gives an odd total; the remaining fixed points, which are the symmetric equilibria, therefore also number an odd amount.
The continuous gain map takes a probability simplex to itself. The Brouwer fixed-point theorem supplies a fixed point, whose positive gains would contradict the zero strategy-weighted average payoff excess. Thus all gains vanish, giving a strategy that is a best response to itself. In a symmetric bimatrix game, this produces a symmetric equilibrium.
For a symmetric bimatrix game with payoff matrices , any nonzero satisfying these equations gives the symmetric Nash equilibrium . Every positive coordinate attains the same maximal payoff. This one-vector construction differs from a two-vector Lemke-Howson algorithm path, which can return asymmetric equilibria.
The Lemke-Howson algorithm follows an almost completely labeled path in the product of two best-response polytopes of a bimatrix game. Drop one label at the artificial zero pair, then alternately pivot away the duplicated label until the dropped label returns. A nonzero completely labeled endpoint, after normalization, gives a Nash equilibrium. The two players' vectors must be kept separate even in a symmetric game.
Complementary pivoting follows adjacent bases while maintaining all but one label of a complementarity system. The Lemke-Howson algorithm for a bimatrix game follows the duplicated label between two tableaux until it restores the dropped label at a nonzero completely labelled pair. Normalization then gives a Nash equilibrium.
Normalize each player's positive pure-strategy payoff improvements to define a continuous self-map of the product of their mixed-strategy simplices. At a Brouwer fixed point every positive improvement must vanish, giving a Nash equilibrium.
Articles by others on the same topic
Nash equilibrium is a concept in game theory named after mathematician John Nash. It refers to a situation in a strategic game where no player can benefit by changing their strategy unilaterally, assuming that the other players' strategies remain constant. In other words, it is a state in which each player's strategy is optimal given the strategies of all other players.
The best example to look at first is the penalty kick left right Nash equilibrium.
Then, a much more interesting example is choosing a deck of a TCG competition: Magic: The Gathering meta-based deck choice is a bimatrix game, which is the exact same, but each player has N choices rather than 2.
The next case that should be analyzed is the prisoner's dilemma.
The key idea is that:
- imagine that the game will be played many times between two players
- if one player always chooses one deck, the other player will adapt by choosing the anti-deck
- therefore, the best strategy for both players, is to pick decks randomly, each with a certain probability. This type of probabilistic approach is called a mixed strategy
- if any player deviates from the equilibrium probability, then the other player can add more of the anti-deck to the deck that the other player deviated, and gain an edgeTherefore, using equilibrium probabilities is the optimal way to play