Game Theory in the Hunger Games
The Hunger Games trilogy, which includes bestselling books written by Suzanne Collins and blockbuster films created by Lionsgate, portrays a dystopian society set in America after an apocalyptic-like war. This new society, broken up into 12 districts, is forced to send two tributes each year to compete in the annual Hunger Games. In these games, the tributes between the ages of 12 and 18 are forced to fight to the death until there is a victor.
Since the exploding popularity of this series, many people have taken a closer look into the ideas incorporated in these stories and this (http://www.centives.net/S/2012/game-theory-in-the-hunger-games/) article had a particularly interesting take on how tributes, specifically the main characters Katniss and Peeta, make the decision whether to cooperate with each other or rebel against each other. The author’s reasoning for the article stems from this diagram:
The article describes the decision first through Katniss’s perspective. If Peeta chooses to cooperate, Katniss should certainly choose to rebel, because she will certainly live as opposed to the chance that she might live. If Peeta chooses to rebel, then logically Katniss should still rebel and face the chance that she might die as opposed to certainly dying. On the other hand, Peeta comes to the same conclusion. So it is found that both tributes rebelling is the Nash Equilibria in this situation, and it is easy to see why the tributes don’t all band together and always fail to make a pact to not kill each other.
This game has many of the same aspects as the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Both tributes, like the prisoners, have the option to go free/live. They also face the chance that they will be imprisoned for a long time/die. The middle ground for both the tributes is the slight chance of death, like the shorter sentence for both prisoners. In both of these situations, the Nash Equilibria is not the ideal situation for each person, but also not the worst situation for each person.
Although this article is only based on the author’s opinion of what would happen, it takes game theory to an extreme level and makes the simple idea of a game like the Prisoners Dilemma a matter of life or death.