IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v82y2022ipbs0038012122000969.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolutionary game of emergency logistics path selection under bounded rationality

Author

Listed:
  • Sun, Wenjun
  • Zhu, Changfeng
  • Li, Hui

Abstract

The occurrence of emergencies and secondary disasters causes varying degrees of obstruction on roads used by actors in an emergency rescue logistics network, and the bounded rationality of rescuers in the face of road risks considerably affects the choice of emergency rescue paths. In this regard, this study considered the traffic obstruction caused by emergencies and secondary disasters and the bounded rationality of rescue workers using a framework that combines cumulative prospect theory (CPT) and evolutionary game (EG) theory. The concept of a replicator was used to dynamically describe the game learning behaviors reflected in rescuers’ path selection (PS) decisions, and an EG model was constructed to represent the multi-strategy set of limited rational rescuers. An example is presented to illustrate the dynamic evolution of PS and conduct a sensitivity analysis of parameters. The results showed that the EG model could determine the optimal path (stability strategy) on the basis of road conditions and the number of rescue vehicles traveling along a road network. Factors such as the type and severity of a secondary disaster, the time-related risks faced by rescuers, and the perception of road conditions tremendously affect the PS strategies of rescuers.

Suggested Citation

  • Sun, Wenjun & Zhu, Changfeng & Li, Hui, 2022. "Evolutionary game of emergency logistics path selection under bounded rationality," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:82:y:2022:i:pb:s0038012122000969
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2022.101311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012122000969
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2022.101311?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. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    3. Kaniovski Yuri M. & Young H. Peyton, 1995. "Learning Dynamics in Games with Stochastic Perturbations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 330-363, November.
    4. Temelcan, Gizem & Kocken, Hale Gonce & Albayrak, Inci, 2021. "Fuzzy modelling of static system optimum traffic assignment problem having multi origin-destination pair," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. de Moraes Ramos, Giselle & Daamen, Winnie & Hoogendoorn, Serge, 2013. "Modelling travellers' heterogeneous route choice behaviour as prospect maximizers," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 17-33.
    6. Ou, Hui & Tang, Tie-Qiao & Zhang, Jian, 2020. "Impacts of bounded rationality on trip cost in a two-route traffic network," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 540(C).
    7. Xin-gang, Zhao & Ling-zhi, Ren & Yu-zhuo, Zhang & Guan, Wan, 2018. "Evolutionary game analysis on the behavior strategies of power producers in renewable portfolio standard," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 505-516.
    8. Oruc, Buse Eylul & Kara, Bahar Yetis, 2018. "Post-disaster assessment routing problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 76-102.
    9. Hofbauer, Josef & Sandholm, William H., 2007. "Evolution in games with randomly disturbed payoffs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 47-69, January.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "Evolutionary Games in Economics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 637-666, May.
    12. Noham, Reut & Tzur, Michal, 2018. "Designing humanitarian supply chains by incorporating actual post-disaster decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(3), pages 1064-1077.
    13. Colin Camerer, 1998. "Bounded Rationality in Individual Decision Making," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 1(2), pages 163-183, September.
    14. Yang, Xia & Ban, Xuegang (Jeff) & Mitchell, John, 2018. "Modeling multimodal transportation network emergency evacuation considering evacuees’ cooperative behavior," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 380-397.
    15. Zhou, Bo & Song, Qiankun & Zhao, Zhenjiang & Liu, Tangzhi, 2020. "A reinforcement learning scheme for the equilibrium of the in-vehicle route choice problem based on congestion game," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 371(C).
    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. Jiang, Ke & Zhang, Jiaming & Zhang, Leilei & Wang, Die & Wang, Yusheng, 2023. "Sustainable cooperation in the watershed ecological compensation public-private partnership project: Lessons from China's Chishui river basin," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Jun Qian & Tongda Zhang & Xiao Sun & Yueting Chai, 2023. "The coordination of collective and individual solutions in risk-resistant scenarios," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 96(2), pages 1-15, 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. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Omane-Adjepong, Maurice & Ababio, Kofi Agyarko & Alagidede, Imhotep Paul, 2019. "Time-frequency analysis of behaviourally classified financial asset markets," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 54-69.
    3. Roger J. Jiao & Feng Zhou & Chih-Hsing Chu, 2017. "Decision theoretic modeling of affective and cognitive needs for product experience engineering: key issues and a conceptual framework," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 28(7), pages 1755-1767, October.
    4. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    5. Marie Pfiffelmann, 2011. "Solving the St. Petersburg Paradox in cumulative prospect theory: the right amount of probability weighting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 325-341, September.
    6. Horst Zank, 2010. "On probabilities and loss aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-261, March.
    7. Liang Zou, 2006. "An Alternative to Prospect Theory," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, May.
    8. Stracca, Livio, 2004. "Behavioral finance and asset prices: Where do we stand?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-405, June.
    9. Massimiliano Amarante & Mario Ghossoub & Edmund Phelps, 2012. "Contracting for Innovation under Knightian Uncertainty," Cahiers de recherche 18-2012, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    10. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Olivier L’Haridon & Horst Zank, 2010. "Separating curvature and elevation: A parametric probability weighting function," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 39-65, August.
    11. Xue Dong He & Sang Hu & Jan Obłój & Xun Yu Zhou, 2017. "Technical Note—Path-Dependent and Randomized Strategies in Barberis’ Casino Gambling Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 97-103, February.
    12. Yaron Azrieli & Christopher P. Chambers & Paul J. Healy, 2020. "Incentives in experiments with objective lotteries," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 1-29, March.
    13. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.
    14. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Jonas Frey, 2020. "Optimal Stopping in a Dynamic Salience Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8496, CESifo.
    16. Zhou, Yuyang & Wang, Peiyu & Zheng, Shuyan & Zhao, Minhe & Lam, William H.K. & Chen, Anthony & Sze, N.N. & Chen, Yanyan, 2024. "Modeling dynamic travel mode choices using cumulative prospect theory," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    17. Luís Santos-Pinto & Adrian Bruhin & José Mata & Thomas Åstebro, 2015. "Detecting heterogeneous risk attitudes with mixed gambles," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(4), pages 573-600, December.
    18. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2014. "Dual criteria decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 101-113.
      • Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet, 2009. "Dual Criteria Decisions," Working Papers 02-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    19. Yokoo, Hide-Fumi & Arimura, Toshi H. & Chattopadhyay, Mriduchhanda & Katayama, Hajime, 2023. "Subjective risk belief function in the field: Evidence from cooking fuel choices and health in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    20. R. Luce & A. Marley, 2005. "Ranked Additive Utility Representations of Gambles: Old and New Axiomatizations," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 21-62, January.

    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:soceps:v:82:y:2022:i:pb:s0038012122000969. 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/seps .

    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.