Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Game Trees For Decision Analysis

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Game trees (or extensive-form games) were first defined by von Neumann and Morgenstern in 1944. In this paper we examine the use of game trees for representing Bayesian decision problems. We propose a method for solving game trees using local computation. This method is a special case of a method due to Wilson for computing equilibria in 2-person games. Game trees differ from decision trees in the representations of information constraints and uncertainty. We compare the game tree representation and solution technique with other techniques for decision analysis such as decision trees, influence diagrams, and valuation networks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Call, H. J. and Miller, W. A. (1990), A comparison of approaches and implementations for automating decision analysis, Reliability Engineering and System Safety 30, 115–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes J. M. and Shenoy, P. P. (1996), A forward Monte Carlo method for solving influence diagrams using local computation. Working Paper No. 273, School of Business, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covaliu, Z. and Oliver, R. M. (1995), Representation and solution of decision problems using sequential decision diagrams, Management Science 41(12), 1860–1881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung, R. M. and Shacter, R. D. (1990), Contingent influence diagram. Working Paper, Advanced Decision Systems, Mountain View, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (1992), Games in extensive and strategic form, in R. J. Aumann and S. Hart (eds.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, Vol. 1, pp. 19–40. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, R. A. and Matheson, J. E. (1981), Influence diagrams, reprinted in R. A. Howard and J. E.Matheson (eds.), The Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis (1984), Vol. 2, pp. 719–762. Menlo Park, CA: Strategic Decisions Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkwood, C. W. (1993), An algebraic approach to formulating and solving large models for sequential decisions under uncertainty, Management Science 39(7), 900–913.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps, D. and Wilson, R. (1982), Sequential equilibria, Econometrica 50, 863–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, H. W. (1953), Extensive games and the problem of information, in H. W. Kuhn and A. W. Tucker (eds.), Contributions to the Theory of Games, Vol. 2, pp. 193–216. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olmsted, S. M. (1983), On representing and solving decision problems. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Engineering-Economic Systems, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H. and Schlaifer, R. O. (1961), Applied Statistical Decision Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. (1968), Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices Under Uncertainty. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shachter, R. D. (1986), Evaluating influence diagram, Operations Research 34(6), 871–882.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenoy, P. P. (1992), Valuation-based systems for Bayesian decision analysis, Operations Research 40(3), 463–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenoy, P. P. (1993a), A new method for representing and solving Bayesian decision problems, in D. J. Hand (ed.), Artificial Intelligence Frontiers in Statistics: AI and Statistics III, pp. 119–138. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenoy, P. P. (1993b), Valuation network representation and solution of asymmetric decision problems. Working Paper No. 246, School of Business, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenoy P. P. (1994), A comparison of graphical techniques for decision analysis, European Journal of Operational Research 78(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shenoy, P. P. (1995), A new pruning method for solving decision trees and game trees, in P. Besnard and S. Hanks (eds.), Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of the Eleventh Conference, pp. 482–490. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. E., Holtzman, S. and Matheson, J. E. (1993), Structuring conditional relationships in influence diagram, Operations Research 41(2), 280–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern O. (1944), Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (2nd edn. 1947, 3rd edn. 1953). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, R. (1972), Computing equilibria of two-person games from the extensive form, Management Science 18(7), 448–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zermelo, E. (1913), Uber eine Anwendung der Mengenlehre auf die Theorie des Schachspiel, Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Mathematics, Vol. 2, pp. 501–504. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business, University of Kansas, Summerfield Hall, Lawrence, KS, 66045-2003, U.S.A

    Prakash P. Shenoy

Authors
  1. Prakash P. Shenoy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shenoy, P.P. Game Trees For Decision Analysis. Theory and Decision 44, 149–171 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004982328196

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004982328196

Search

Navigation