IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/apmaco/v311y2017icp184-194.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inverse engineering preferences in simple games

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia, A.
  • Hipel, K.W.

Abstract

A method for inverse engineering decision-makers’ preferences based on observable behaviour is designed. This technique allows analysts to narrow down the list of potential preference rankings of possible states in a conflict for each decision-maker using probabilities and expected values. During the inverse engineering procedure, the list of all possible preference rankings is narrowed as decision-makers move and counter-move. Accurate preference information is key to building quality conflict and game models; however, preference rankings for decision-makers are often difficult to obtain directly. A simple two decision-maker, four-state game is used to demonstrate the applicability of the method and to illustrate the insights it provides.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia, A. & Hipel, K.W., 2017. "Inverse engineering preferences in simple games," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 311(C), pages 184-194.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:311:y:2017:i:c:p:184-194
    DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2017.05.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0096300317303041
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.amc.2017.05.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luai Hamouda & D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel, 2004. "Strength of Preference in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 449-462, September.
    2. Andrea Galeotti & Sanjeev Goyal & Matthew O. Jackson & Fernando Vega-Redondo & Leeat Yariv, 2010. "Network Games," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 218-244.
    3. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
    4. Haiyan Xu & Keith Hipel & D. Kilgour & Ye Chen, 2010. "Combining strength and uncertainty for preferences in the graph model for conflict resolution with multiple decision makers," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 497-521, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Garcia, Amanda & Obeidi, Amer & Hipel, Keith W., 2018. "Strategic advice for decision-making under conflict based on observed behaviour," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 332(C), pages 96-104.
    2. Yu Han & Haiyan Xu & Liping Fang & Keith W. Hipel, 2022. "An Integer Programming Approach to Solving the Inverse Graph Model for Conflict Resolution with Two Decision Makers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 23-48, February.
    3. Mengjie Yang & Kai Yang & Yue Che & Shiqiang Lu & Fengyun Sun & Ying Chen & Mengting Li, 2021. "Resolving Transboundary Water Conflicts: Dynamic Evolutionary Analysis Using an Improved GMCR Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(10), pages 3321-3338, August.
    4. Keith W. Hipel & Liping Fang & D. Marc Kilgour, 2020. "The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: Reflections on Three Decades of Development," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 11-60, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shawei He, 2019. "Coalition Analysis in Basic Hierarchical Graph Model for Conflict Resolution with Application to Climate Change Governance Disputes," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 879-906, October.
    2. Zhao, Shinan & Xu, Haiyan & Hipel, Keith W. & Fang, Liping, 2019. "Mixed stabilities for analyzing opponents’ heterogeneous behavior within the graph model for conflict resolution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 621-632.
    3. Yew-Kwang Ng & Xiaokai Yang, 2005. "Specialization, Information, And Growth: A Sequential Equilibrium Analysis," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: An Inframarginal Approach To Trade Theory, chapter 20, pages 447-474, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Todd D. Gerarden & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Assessing the Energy-Efficiency Gap," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1486-1525, December.
    5. Matteo Richiardi, 2003. "The Promises and Perils of Agent-Based Computational Economics," LABORatorio R. Revelli Working Papers Series 29, LABORatorio R. Revelli, Centre for Employment Studies.
    6. Graham Elliott & Ivana Komunjer & Allan Timmermann, 2008. "Biases in Macroeconomic Forecasts: Irrationality or Asymmetric Loss?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(1), pages 122-157, March.
    7. Yousaf, Imran & Youssef, Manel & Goodell, John W., 2022. "Quantile connectedness between sentiment and financial markets: Evidence from the S&P 500 twitter sentiment index," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    8. Michel S. Zouboulakis & John Kamarianos, 2002. "Racionalidad y cooperación entre firmas. Examen del comportamiento habitual de las industrias griegas," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 4(7), pages 98-113, July-Dece.
    9. Sergio Currarini & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandro Tavoni, 2016. "Network Economics and the Environment: Insights and Perspectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 159-189, September.
    10. Arthur Schram & Boris Van Leeuwen & Theo Offerman, 2013. "Superstars Need Social Benefits: An Experiment on Network Formation," Working Papers 1306, Departament Empresa, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, revised Jul 2013.
    11. Sanstad, Alan H. & DeCanio, Stephen J. & Boyd, Gale A. & Koomey, Jonathan G., 2001. "Estimating bounds on the economy-wide effects of the CEF policy scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(14), pages 1299-1311, November.
    12. Renaud Bourlès & Yann Bramoullé & Eduardo Perez‐Richet, 2017. "Altruism in Networks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 675-689, March.
    13. Luca Dall’Asta & Paolo Pin & Abolfazl Ramezanpour, 2011. "Optimal Equilibria of the Best Shot Game," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(6), pages 885-901, December.
    14. DeCanio, Stephen J. & Watkins, William E., 1998. "Information processing and organizational structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 275-294, August.
    15. Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Marklein, Felix & Sunde, Uwe, 2009. "Biased probability judgment: Evidence of incidence and relationship to economic outcomes from a representative sample," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 903-915, December.
    16. Allouch, Nizar, 2017. "The cost of segregation in (social) networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 329-342.
    17. Mukdad Ibrahim, 2016. "Bounded Rationality and Budgeting," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 6(4), pages 755-760.
    18. Gordon Burt, 1997. "Cultural Convergence in Historical Cultural Space-Time," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 21(4), pages 291-305, December.
    19. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    20. Jesper Breinbjerg & Alexander Sebald & Lars Peter Østerdal, 2016. "Strategic behavior and social outcomes in a bottleneck queue: experimental evidence," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 20(3), pages 207-236, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:apmaco:v:311:y:2017:i:c:p:184-194. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-mathematics-and-computation .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.