Two Classes of Games on Polyhedral Sets in Systems Economic Studies

Chapter
Part of the Springer Optimization and Its Applications book series (SOIA, volume 100)

Abstract

Two classes of two- and three-person games on polyhedral sets of player strategies that appear in estimating fair shares of the market participants in a marketplace are considered. In games from both classes, payoff functions of the players are sums of linear functions of vector arguments or those of linear ones and a bilinear function. Games from the first class are those in which player strategies are connected, i.e., they cannot be chosen by the players independently, whereas player strategies in games from the second class are disjoint. For the games from both classes either sufficient or necessary and sufficient conditions of the equilibriums are provided, and these conditions allow one to calculate the equilibriums by effective optimization techniques. This fact contributes to making the equilibrium concept a productive approach to quantitatively analyzing conflicts in systems economic studies. Economic problems that appear in systems described by nonlinear mathematical models with linear constraints, in particular, by some network models, including (a) restructuring a company and positioning the restructured company in a market or in several markets, (b) forming a pool of regional clients interested in selling their products and in buying somebody else’s ones outside their regions via forward contracts offered by regional brokers, (c) determining initial prices for procurement contracts to be tendered by a public administration, (d) finding competitive transportation tariffs by a railroad company competing with tracking companies for providing transportation services both in a region and between two regions, (e) calculating an optimal volume of producing electricity by a base load power plant in a part of a country’s electrical grid under an uncertain demand in the corresponding network of the grid customers, and (f) forming a public–private partnership to develop a set of projects that a public administration needs to develop and implement, but does not have funds to finance on its own (partly or even completely) are discussed to illustrate how the games under consideration appear, and how they can be analyzed.

References

  1. 1.
    Hooley, G., et. al.: Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Williams, T.: Positioning for Professionals: How Professional Knowledge Firms Differentiate Their Way to Success. Wiley Professional Advisory Series. Wiley, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sangupta, S.: Strategies for Competitive Advantage. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gintis, H.: Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modeling Strategic Interaction, 2nd edn. Princeton University Press, New Jersey (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
     Holt, A.: Markets, Games and Strategic Behavior. Addison Welsley, Reading, MA (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
     Nesterov, Yu.: Introductory Lectures on Convex Optimization. Springer, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lambert, E.: The Rise of the Speculator and the Origins of the World’s Biggest Markets. Basic Books, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kline, D.: Fundamentals of the Futures Market. McGraw-Hill, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Belenky, A.: Operations Research in Transportation Systems: Ideas and Schemes of Optimization Methods for Strategic Planning and Operations Management. Springer, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Belenky, A.: A 2-person game on a polyhedral set of connected strategies. Comput. Math. Appl. 33(6), 99–125 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Belenky, A.: Analyzing the potential of a firm: an operations research approach. Math. Comput. Model. 35, 1405–1424 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Belenky, A.: A planning problem in a class of linear models. Autom. Remote Control 93(11), 1667–1673 (1978)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
     Bodlaender, H., Gritzmann, P., Klee, V., Leeuwen, J.: Computational complexity of norm-maximization. Combinatorica 10(2), 203–225 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Belenky, A., Yunusova, A.: Games with connected player strategies for analyzing the competitiveness of a railroad company in a cargo transportation marketplace. In: Proceeding of the 2013 International Conference on Information Science and Cloud Computing, Guangzhou, China, 7–8 December 2013, pp. 10–17 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Belenky, A.: An approach to desigining a mechanism for forming public-private partnerships, EURO/INFORMS, 26th European Conference on Operations Research, 1–4 July 2013, Rome, Abstract Book, p. 260 (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Belenky, A.: Three quantitative management problems in public procurement and decision procedures for their analysis and solving. Proc. Comput. Sci. 17, 1142–1153 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Belenky, A.: Application of continuous optimization techniques for calculating equilibriums in large-scale three-person public procurement games. In: International Conference of Continuous Optimization ICCOPT-2103, 27 July–1 August 2013, Abstracts, p. 55 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Belenky, A.: Finding optimal production and selling strategies for an electricity generator in a part of a country’s electrical grid, Proc. Comput. Sci. 31, 1150–1159 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Belenky, A.: A game-theoretic approach to optimizing the scale of incorporating renewable sources of energy and electricity storing systems into a regional electrical grid, Journal of Global Optimization (submitted).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Belenky, A.: Finding an optimal strategy of incorporating renewable sources of energy and electricity storing facilities into a regional electrical grid, Journal of Global Optimization (submitted).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koutsopoulos, I., Tassiulas, L.: Optimal control policies for power demand scheduling in the smart grid. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 30(6), 1049–1060 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shor, N.: Quadratic optimization problems. Sov. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. (Formerly Eng. Cybern.) 6, 1–11 (1997)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ralph, D.: Stochastic equilibrium in investment models: capacity expansion in the power sector. In: International Conference of Continuous Optimization ICCOPT-2103, 27 July–1 August 2013, Abstracts, p. 48 (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Leadbetter, J., Swan, L.: Battery storage system for residential electricity peak demand shaving. Energy Build. 55, 685–692 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    He, X., et al.: A novel business model for aggregating the values of electricity storage. Energy Policy 39(3), 1575–1585 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics for Economics and the Decision Choice and Analysis LaboratoryThe National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Trapeznikov Institute of Control SciencesRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Center for Engineering Systems FundamentalsMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations