IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v167y2005i2p475-492.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Playing for time: A sequential inspection game

Author

Listed:
  • Avenhaus, Rudolf
  • Canty, Morton John

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Avenhaus, Rudolf & Canty, Morton John, 2005. "Playing for time: A sequential inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(2), pages 475-492, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:167:y:2005:i:2:p:475-492
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(04)00228-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. John Canty, Morton & Rothenstein, Daniel & Avenhaus, Rudolf, 2001. "Timely inspection and deterrence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 208-223, May.
    2. Harvey Diamond, 1982. "Minimax Policies for Unobservable Inspections," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(1), pages 139-153, February.
    3. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Von Stengel, Bernhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 2002. "Inspection games," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 51, pages 1947-1987, Elsevier.
    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. Bernhard von Stengel, 2016. "Recursive Inspection Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 935-952, August.
    2. Fandel, G. & Trockel, J., 2013. "Avoiding non-optimal management decisions by applying a three-person inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(1), pages 85-93.
    3. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Krieger, Thomas, 2013. "Distributing inspections in space and time – Proposed solution of a difficult problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 712-719.
    4. Kjell Hausken, 2019. "Special versus general protection and attack of two assets," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 29(4), pages 53-93.
    5. Owen Q. Wu & Volodymyr Babich, 2012. "Unit-Contingent Power Purchase Agreement and Asymmetric Information About Plant Outage," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 245-261, April.
    6. Naraphorn Haphuriwat & Vicki M. Bier & Henry H. Willis, 2011. "Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons in Container Freight Through Detection and Retaliation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 88-102, June.
    7. Vicki Bier & Naraphorn Haphuriwat, 2011. "Analytical method to identify the number of containers to inspect at U.S. ports to deter terrorist attacks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 137-158, July.
    8. Zoroa, N. & Fernández-Sáez, M.J. & Zoroa, P., 2011. "A foraging problem: Sit-and-wait versus active predation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 208(2), pages 131-141, January.
    9. Vassili Kolokoltsov, 2017. "The Evolutionary Game of Pressure (or Interference), Resistance and Collaboration," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 42(4), pages 915-944, November.
    10. Ben Hermans & Herbert Hamers & Roel Leus & Roy Lindelauf, 2019. "Timely exposure of a secret project: Which activities to monitor?," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(6), pages 451-468, September.
    11. Kjell Hausken, 2014. "Individual versus overarching protection and attack of assets," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 22(1), pages 89-112, March.
    12. Dong, Xiaoqing & Li, Chaolin & Li, Ji & Wang, Jia & Huang, Wantao, 2010. "A game-theoretic analysis of implementation of cleaner production policies in the Chinese electroplating industry," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(12), pages 1442-1448.
    13. Deutsch, Yael, 2021. "A polynomial-time method to compute all Nash equilibria solutions of a general two-person inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(3), pages 1036-1052.
    14. Hohzaki, Ryusuke & Maehara, Hiroki, 2010. "A single-shot game of multi-period inspection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1410-1418, December.
    15. Nourinejad, Mehdi & Gandomi, Amir & Roorda, Matthew J., 2020. "Illegal parking and optimal enforcement policies with search friction," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    16. Hausken, Kjell, 2017. "Special versus general protection and attack of parallel and series components," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 239-256.
    17. Widodo, Erwin & Rochmadhan, Oryza Akbar & Lukmandono, & Januardi,, 2022. "Modeling Bayesian inspection game for non-performing loan problems," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).

    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. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Krieger, Thomas, 2013. "Distributing inspections in space and time – Proposed solution of a difficult problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 712-719.
    2. Stamatios Katsikas & Vassili Kolokoltsov & Wei Yang, 2016. "Evolutionary Inspection and Corruption Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-25, October.
    3. Avenhaus, Rudolf & Canty, Morton & Marc Kilgour, D. & von Stengel, Bernhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 1996. "Inspection games in arms control," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 383-394, May.
    4. John Canty, Morton & Rothenstein, Daniel & Avenhaus, Rudolf, 2001. "Timely inspection and deterrence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 208-223, May.
    5. Meijerink, Gerdien W., 2007. "If services aren't delivered, people won't pay: the role of measurement problems and monitoring in Payments for Environmental Services," 106th Seminar, October 25-27, 2007, Montpellier, France 7948, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Andrew Yim, 2009. "Efficient Committed Budget for Implementing Target Audit Probability for Many Inspectees," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 2000-2018, December.
    7. Rudolf Avenhaus & Morton J. Canty, 2011. "Deterrence, technology, and the sensible distribution of arms control verification resources," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(3), pages 295-303, April.
    8. Páez-Pérez, David & Sánchez-Silva, Mauricio, 2016. "A dynamic principal-agent framework for modeling the performance of infrastructure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(2), pages 576-594.
    9. Guzmán, Cristóbal & Riffo, Javiera & Telha, Claudio & Van Vyve, Mathieu, 2022. "A sequential Stackelberg game for dynamic inspection problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 727-739.
    10. von Stengel, Bernhard & Zamir, Shmuel, 2010. "Leadership games with convex strategy sets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 446-457, July.
    11. MAULEON, Ana & VANNETELBOSCH, Vincent, 1999. "Coalitional negotiation," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1999020, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    12. Bård Harstad & Torben K. Mideksa, 2017. "Conservation Contracts and Political Regimes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(4), pages 1708-1734.
    13. Hulisi Ogut & Huseyin Cavusoglu & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2008. "Intrusion-Detection Policies for IT Security Breaches," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 112-123, February.
    14. Guzman, Cristobal & Riffo, Javiera & Telha, Claudio & Van Vyve, Mathieu, 2021. "A Sequential Stackelberg Game for Dynamic Inspection Problems," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2021036, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    15. Yael Deutsch & Boaz Golany, 2016. "Multiple agents finitely repeated inspection game with dismissals," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 7-26, February.
    16. Zoroa, N. & Fernández-Sáez, M.J. & Zoroa, P., 2012. "Patrolling a perimeter," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 571-582.
    17. Fandel, Günter & Trockel, Jan, 2011. "Optimal lot sizing in a non-cooperative material manager-controller game," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 256-261, September.
    18. Deb, Saikat Sovan & Kalev, Petko S. & Marisetty, Vijaya B., 2010. "Are price limits really bad for equity markets?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 2462-2471, October.
    19. von Stengel, Bernhard, 2016. "Recursive inspection games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68299, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Alpern, Steven & Morton, Alec & Papadaki, Katerina, 2011. "Patrolling games," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 32210, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    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:ejores:v:167:y:2005:i:2:p:475-492. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.