IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/apmaco/v311y2017icp184-194.html

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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
    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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    7. Stephan Schulmeister, 2000. "Technical Analysis and Exchange Rate Dynamics," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 25857.
    8. Robin Maximilian Stetzka & Stefan Winter, 2023. "How rational is gambling?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1488, September.
    9. Serena Brianzoni & Roy Cerqueti & Elisabetta Michetti, 2010. "A Dynamic Stochastic Model of Asset Pricing with Heterogeneous Beliefs," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 165-188, February.
    10. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2012. "Bounded Rationality and Voting Decisions Exploring a 160-Year Period," Working Papers 2012.70, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    12. John P. Papay & Richard J. Murnane & John B. Willett, 2011. "How Performance Information Affects Human-Capital Investment Decisions: The Impact of Test-Score Labels on Educational Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 17120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Jaylson Jair da Silveira & Gilberto Tadeu Lima, 2007. "Regimes De Ajustamento Nominal Em Uma Macrodinâmica Evolucionária," Anais do XXXV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 35th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 021, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    14. Demery, David & Duck, Nigel W., 2007. "The theory of rational expectations and the interpretation of macroeconomic data," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-18, March.
    15. David Demery & Nigel Duck, 2002. "Optimally Rational Expectations and Macroeconomics," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 02/533, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    16. Michael Suk-Young Chwe, 1998. "Culture, Circles, And Commercials," Rationality and Society, , vol. 10(1), pages 47-75, February.
    17. Augier, Mie & March, James G., 2002. "A model scholar: Herbert A. Simon (1916-2001)," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 1-17, September.
    18. Allouch, Nizar, 2015. "On the private provision of public goods on networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 527-552.
    19. Dohmen, T.J. & Falk, A. & Huffman, D. & Marklein, F. & Sunde, U., 2009. "The non-use of Bayes rule: representative evidence on bounded rationality," Research Memorandum 038, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    20. F. Cavalli & A. Naimzada & N. Pecora & M. Pireddu, 2021. "Market sentiment and heterogeneous agents in an evolutive financial model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 1189-1219, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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.