Airport problem

Last updated

In mathematics and especially game theory, the airport problem is a type of fair division problem in which it is decided how to distribute the cost of an airport runway among different players who need runways of different lengths. The problem was introduced by S. C. Littlechild and G. Owen in 1973. [1] Their proposed solution is:

Contents

  1. Divide the cost of providing the minimum level of required facility for the smallest type of aircraft equally among the number of landings of all aircraft
  2. Divide the incremental cost of providing the minimum level of required facility for the second smallest type of aircraft (above the cost of the smallest type) equally among the number of landings of all but the smallest type of aircraft. Continue thus until finally the incremental cost of the largest type of aircraft is divided equally among the number of landings made by the largest aircraft type.

The authors note that the resulting set of landing charges is the Shapley value for an appropriately defined game.

Introduction

In an airport problem there is a finite population N and a nonnegative function C: N-R. For technical reasons it is assumed that the population is taken from the set of the natural numbers: players are identified with their 'ranking number'. The cost function satisfies the inequality C(i) <C(j)whenever i <j. It is typical for airport problems that the cost C(i)is assumed to be a part of the cost C(j) if i<j, i.e. a coalition S is confronted with costs c(S): =MAX C(i). In this way an airport problem generates an airport game (N,c). As the value of each one-person coalition (i) equals C(i), we can rediscover the airport problem from the airport game theory. [2]

Nash Equilibrium

Nash equilibrium, also known as non-cooperative game equilibrium, is an essential term in game theory described by John Nash in 1951. In a game process, regardless of the opponent's strategy choice, one of the parties will choose a certain strategy, which is called dominant strategy. If any participant chooses the optimal strategy when the strategies of all other participants are determined, then this combination is defined as a Nash equilibrium. A game may include multiple Nash equilibrium or none. In addition, a combination of strategies is called the Nash balance. when each player's balance strategy is to achieve the maximum value of its expected return, at the same time, all other players also follow this strategy. [3]

Shapley value

The Shapley value is a solution concept used in game theory. The Shapley value is mainly applicable to the following situation: the contribution of each actor is not equal, but each participant cooperates with each other to obtain profit or return. The efficiency of the resource allocation and combination of the two distribution methods are more reasonable and fair, and it also reflects the process of mutual game among the league members. [4] However, the benefit distribution plan of the Shapley value method has not considered the risk sharing factors of organization members, which essentially implies the assumption of equal risk sharing. It is necessary to make appropriate amendments to the benefit distribution plan of Shapley value method according to the size of risk sharing.

Example

An airport needs to build a runway for 4 different aircraft types. The building cost associated with each aircraft is 8, 11, 13, 18 for aircraft A, B, C, D. We would come up with the following cost table based on Shapley value:

AircraftAdding AAdding BAdding CAdding DShapley value
Marginal Cost8325
Cost to A22
Cost to B213
Cost to C2114
Cost to D21159
Total18

See also

Introduction video of confrontation analysis. [5]

List of games in game theory. [6]

Related Research Articles

Game theory is the study of mathematical models of strategic interactions among rational agents. It has applications in all fields of social science, as well as in logic, systems science and computer science. The concepts of game theory are used extensively in economics as well. The traditional methods of game theory addressed two-person zero-sum games, in which each participant's gains or losses are exactly balanced by the losses and gains of other participants. In the 21st century, the advanced game theories apply to a wider range of behavioral relations; it is now an umbrella term for the science of logical decision making in humans, animals, as well as computers.

Zero-sum game is a mathematical representation in game theory and economic theory of a situation that involves two sides, where the result is an advantage for one side and an equivalent loss for the other. In other words, player one's gain is equivalent to player two's loss, with the result that the net improvement in benefit of the game is zero.

In game theory, the Nash equilibrium, named after the mathematician John Nash, is the most common way to define the solution of a non-cooperative game involving two or more players. In a Nash equilibrium, each player is assumed to know the equilibrium strategies of the other players, and no one has anything to gain by changing only one's own strategy. The principle of Nash equilibrium dates back to the time of Cournot, who in 1838 applied it to competing firms choosing outputs.

In game theory, the best response is the strategy which produces the most favorable outcome for a player, taking other players' strategies as given. The concept of a best response is central to John Nash's best-known contribution, the Nash equilibrium, the point at which each player in a game has selected the best response to the other players' strategies.

In game theory, a player's strategy is any of the options which they choose in a setting where the optimal outcome depends not only on their own actions but on the actions of others. The discipline mainly concerns the action of a player in a game affecting the behavior or actions of other players. Some examples of "games" include chess, bridge, poker, monopoly, diplomacy or battleship. A player's strategy will determine the action which the player will take at any stage of the game. In studying game theory, economists enlist a more rational lens in analyzing decisions rather than the psychological or sociological perspectives taken when analyzing relationships between decisions of two or more parties in different disciplines.

Bertrand competition is a model of competition used in economics, named after Joseph Louis François Bertrand (1822–1900). It describes interactions among firms (sellers) that set prices and their customers (buyers) that choose quantities at the prices set. The model was formulated in 1883 by Bertrand in a review of Antoine Augustin Cournot's book Recherches sur les Principes Mathématiques de la Théorie des Richesses (1838) in which Cournot had put forward the Cournot model. Cournot's model argued that each firm should maximise its profit by selecting a quantity level and then adjusting price level to sell that quantity. The outcome of the model equilibrium involved firms pricing above marginal cost; hence, the competitive price. In his review, Bertrand argued that each firm should instead maximise its profits by selecting a price level that undercuts its competitors' prices, when their prices exceed marginal cost. The model was not formalized by Bertrand; however, the idea was developed into a mathematical model by Francis Ysidro Edgeworth in 1889.

In game theory, a Perfect Bayesian Equilibrium (PBE) is a solution with Bayesian probability to a turn-based game with incomplete information. More specifically, it is an equilibrium concept that uses Bayesian updating to describe player behavior in dynamic games with incomplete information. Perfect Bayesian equilibria are used to solve the outcome of games where players take turns but are unsure of the "type" of their opponent, which occurs when players don't know their opponent's preference between individual moves. A classic example of a dynamic game with types is a war game where the player is unsure whether their opponent is a risk-taking "hawk" type or a pacifistic "dove" type. Perfect Bayesian Equilibria are a refinement of Bayesian Nash equilibrium (BNE), which is a solution concept with Bayesian probability for non-turn-based games.

In game theory, a Bayesian game is a strategic decision-making model which assumes players have incomplete information. Players hold private information relevant to the game, meaning that the payoffs are not common knowledge. Bayesian games model the outcome of player interactions using aspects of Bayesian probability. They are notable because they allowed, for the first time in game theory, for the specification of the solutions to games with incomplete information.

In game theory, folk theorems are a class of theorems describing an abundance of Nash equilibrium payoff profiles in repeated games. The original Folk Theorem concerned the payoffs of all the Nash equilibria of an infinitely repeated game. This result was called the Folk Theorem because it was widely known among game theorists in the 1950s, even though no one had published it. Friedman's (1971) Theorem concerns the payoffs of certain subgame-perfect Nash equilibria (SPE) of an infinitely repeated game, and so strengthens the original Folk Theorem by using a stronger equilibrium concept: subgame-perfect Nash equilibria rather than Nash equilibria.

In game theory, the outcome of a game is the ultimate result of a strategic interaction with one or more people, dependant on the choices made by all participants in a certain exchange. It represents the final payoff resulting from a set of actions that individuals can take within the context of the game. Outcomes are pivotal in determining the payoffs and expected utility for parties involved. Game theorists commonly study how the outcome of a game is determined and what factors affect it.

In game theory, the purification theorem was contributed by Nobel laureate John Harsanyi in 1973. The theorem aims to justify a puzzling aspect of mixed strategy Nash equilibria: that each player is wholly indifferent amongst each of the actions he puts non-zero weight on, yet he mixes them so as to make every other player also indifferent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Auction theory</span> Branch of applied economics regarding the behavior of bidders in auctions

Auction theory is an applied branch of economics which deals with how bidders act in auction markets and researches how the features of auction markets incentivise predictable outcomes. Auction theory is a tool used to inform the design of real-world auctions. Sellers use auction theory to raise higher revenues while allowing buyers to procure at a lower cost. The conference of the price between the buyer and seller is an economic equilibrium. Auction theorists design rules for auctions to address issues which can lead to market failure. The design of these rulesets encourages optimal bidding strategies among a variety of informational settings. The 2020 Nobel Prize for Economics was awarded to Paul R. Milgrom and Robert B. Wilson “for improvements to auction theory and inventions of new auction formats.”

The revelation principle is a fundamental principle in mechanism design. It states that if a social choice function can be implemented by an arbitrary mechanism, then the same function can be implemented by an incentive-compatible-direct-mechanism with the same equilibrium outcome (payoffs).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First-price sealed-bid auction</span> Auction where all participants concurrently submit undisclosed bids

A first-price sealed-bid auction (FPSBA) is a common type of auction. It is also known as blind auction. In this type of auction, all bidders simultaneously submit sealed bids so that no bidder knows the bid of any other participant. The highest bidder pays the price that was submitted.

Quantal response equilibrium (QRE) is a solution concept in game theory. First introduced by Richard McKelvey and Thomas Palfrey, it provides an equilibrium notion with bounded rationality. QRE is not an equilibrium refinement, and it can give significantly different results from Nash equilibrium. QRE is only defined for games with discrete strategies, although there are continuous-strategy analogues.

Risk dominance and payoff dominance are two related refinements of the Nash equilibrium (NE) solution concept in game theory, defined by John Harsanyi and Reinhard Selten. A Nash equilibrium is considered payoff dominant if it is Pareto superior to all other Nash equilibria in the game. When faced with a choice among equilibria, all players would agree on the payoff dominant equilibrium since it offers to each player at least as much payoff as the other Nash equilibria. Conversely, a Nash equilibrium is considered risk dominant if it has the largest basin of attraction. This implies that the more uncertainty players have about the actions of the other player(s), the more likely they will choose the strategy corresponding to it.

In game theory, a game is said to be a potential game if the incentive of all players to change their strategy can be expressed using a single global function called the potential function. The concept originated in a 1996 paper by Dov Monderer and Lloyd Shapley.

Congestion games (CG) are a class of games in game theory. They represent situations which commonly occur in roads, communication networks, oligopoly markets and natural habitats. There is a set of resources ; there are several players who need resources ; each player chooses a subset of these resources ; the delay in each resource is determined by the number of players choosing a subset that contains this resource. The cost of each player is the sum of delays among all resources he chooses. Naturally, each player wants to minimize his own delay; however, each player's choices impose a negative externality on the other players, which may lead to inefficient outcomes.

In algorithmic game theory, a succinct game or a succinctly representable game is a game which may be represented in a size much smaller than its normal form representation. Without placing constraints on player utilities, describing a game of players, each facing strategies, requires listing utility values. Even trivial algorithms are capable of finding a Nash equilibrium in a time polynomial in the length of such a large input. A succinct game is of polynomial type if in a game represented by a string of length n the number of players, as well as the number of strategies of each player, is bounded by a polynomial in n.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jean-François Mertens</span> Belgian game theorist (1946–2012)

Jean-François Mertens was a Belgian game theorist and mathematical economist.

References

  1. Littlechild, S. C.; Owen, G. (1973). "A Simple Expression for the Shapley Value in a Special Case". Management Science . 20 (3): 370–372. JSTOR   2629727.
  2. Jos, Potters (4 November 1998). "Airport problems and consistent allocation rules" (PDF). Mathematical Social Sciences: 84–85 via JSTOR.
  3. "Nash Equilibrium - Game Theory Concept, Examples and Diagrams". Corporate Finance Institute. Retrieved 2021-04-24.
  4. Molnar, Christoph. 5.9 Shapley Values | Interpretable Machine Learning.
  5. SWOT analysis explained , retrieved 2021-04-26
  6. Nitisha (2015-01-09). "5 Types of Games in Game Theory (With Diagram)". Economics Discussion. Retrieved 2021-04-26.