IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v318y2024i2p656-669.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A robust optimization approach for a two-player force-design game

Author

Listed:
  • Christiansen, Jeffrey
  • Ernst, Andreas T.
  • Rieger, Janosch

Abstract

We present a new approach to force design that relies on robust decision making with a min–max objective, rather than assumptions about the goals and strategy of an opponent. This idea is explored mathematically in the framework of a round-based two-player Stackelberg game representing an arms race, which features the acquisition of assets by both players and an evaluation of the defensive capability against attack from an opponent using a portfolio of possible tactics. Mathematical analysis has been carried out to determine the structure of optimal strategies for this type of game. This allows the strategy of the first player to be represented as a decision tree with possible moves by the second player consisting of convex combinations of extreme points. Using this insight into the structure of solutions, the optimal strategy for the game can be computed using a large linear program. The effectiveness of this approach is demonstrated using numerical examples.

Suggested Citation

  • Christiansen, Jeffrey & Ernst, Andreas T. & Rieger, Janosch, 2024. "A robust optimization approach for a two-player force-design game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(2), pages 656-669.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:318:y:2024:i:2:p:656-669
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2024.04.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221724003023
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2024.04.018?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.

    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:318:y:2024:i:2:p:656-669. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.