IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v237y2016i1d10.1007_s10479-014-1703-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple agents finitely repeated inspection game with dismissals

Author

Listed:
  • Yael Deutsch

    (Technion, Israel Institute of Technology)

  • Boaz Golany

    (Technion, Israel Institute of Technology)

Abstract

This paper deals with an inspection game between a single inspector and several independent (potential) violators over a finite-time horizon. In each period, the inspector gets a renewable inspection resource, which cannot be saved and used in future periods. The inspector allocates it to inspect the (potential) violators. Each violator decides in each period whether to violate or not, and in what probability. A violation may be detected by the inspector with a known and positive probability. When a violation is detected, the responsible violator is “dismissed” from the game. The game terminates when all the violators are detected or when there are no more remaining periods. An efficient method to compute a Nash equilibrium for this game is developed, for any possible value of the (nominal) detection probability. The solution of the game shows that the violators always maintain their detection probability below 0.5.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:237:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-014-1703-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-014-1703-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-014-1703-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-014-1703-6?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. Pablo Casas-Arce, 2010. "Dismissals and quits in repeated games," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 43(1), pages 67-80, April.
    2. D Wu & D L Olson, 2010. "Enterprise risk management: coping with model risk in a large bank," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(2), pages 179-190, February.
    3. Daniel Rothenstein & Shmuel Zamir, 2002. "Imperfect Inspection Games Over Time," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 175-192, January.
    4. Golany, Boaz & Kaplan, Edward H. & Marmur, Abraham & Rothblum, Uriel G., 2009. "Nature plays with dice - terrorists do not: Allocating resources to counter strategic versus probabilistic risks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 198-208, January.
    5. Niyazi Bakır, 2011. "A Stackelberg game model for resource allocation in cargo container security," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 187(1), pages 5-22, July.
    6. 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.
    7. Deutsch, Yael & Golany, Boaz & Rothblum, Uriel G., 2011. "Determining all Nash equilibria in a (bi-linear) inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(2), pages 422-430, December.
    8. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Andrew Samuel, 2012. "Pre‐emptive Corruption, Hold‐up and Repeated Interactions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 79(314), pages 258-283, April.
    9. 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.
    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. Yael Deutsch & Boaz Golany, 2019. "Securing Gates of a Protected Area: A Hybrid Game and Queueing Theory Modeling Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(1), pages 31-45, March.
    2. Deutsch, Yael & Goldberg, Noam & Perlman, Yael, 2019. "Incorporating monitoring technology and on-site inspections into an n-person inspection game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 627-637.
    3. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Hunt, Kyle & Zhuang, Jun, 2024. "A review of attacker-defender games: Current state and paths forward," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 313(2), pages 401-417.
    4. Mohammad Ebrahim Nikoofal & Morteza Pourakbar & Mehmet Gumus, 2023. "Securing containerized supply chain through public and private partnership," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(7), pages 2341-2361, July.
    5. 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.
    6. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Paul, Jomon A., 2017. "Espionage and the optimal standard of the Customs-Trade Partnership against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program in maritime security," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(1), pages 89-107.
    7. Johnston, Iain G., 2022. "Optimal strategies in the fighting fantasy gaming system: Influencing stochastic dynamics by gambling with limited resource," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(3), pages 1272-1281.
    8. Harstad, Bård, 2016. "The market for conservation and other hostages," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 124-151.
    9. Stamatios Katsikas & Vassili Kolokoltsov & Wei Yang, 2016. "Evolutionary Inspection and Corruption Games," Games, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-25, October.
    10. Puneet Agarwal & Kyle Hunt & Shivasubramanian Srinivasan & Jun Zhuang, 2020. "Fire Code Inspection and Compliance: A Game-Theoretic Model Between Fire Inspection Agencies and Building Owners," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 208-226, September.
    11. D׳Agostino, Elena & Seidmann, Daniel J., 2016. "Protecting buyers from fine print," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 42-54.
    12. Anthony Rossiter & Susan M Hester, 2017. "Designing Biosecurity Inspection Regimes to Account for Stakeholder Incentives: An Inspection Game Approach," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(301), pages 277-301, June.
    13. Sushil Gupta & Martin K. Starr & Reza Zanjirani Farahani & Mahsa Mahboob Ghodsi, 2020. "Prevention of Terrorism–An Assessment of Prior POM Work and Future Potentials," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(7), pages 1789-1815, July.
    14. Perea, Federico & Puerto, Justo, 2013. "Revisiting a game theoretic framework for the robust railway network design against intentional attacks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(2), pages 286-292.
    15. Mohammad E. Nikoofal & Jun Zhuang, 2012. "Robust Allocation of a Defensive Budget Considering an Attacker's Private Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 930-943, May.
    16. John Bennett & Matthew D. Rablen, 2021. "Bribery, hold‐up, and bureaucratic structure," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 880-903, July.
    17. David Simchi-Levi & Nikolaos Trichakis & Peter Yun Zhang, 2019. "Designing Response Supply Chain Against Bioattacks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 1246-1268, September.
    18. Ulrich Hendel, 2016. "‘Look like the innocent flower, but be the serpent under’t’: mimicking behaviour of growth-oriented terrorist organizations," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 665-687, September.
    19. Shan, Xiaojun & Zhuang, Jun, 2013. "Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of partially strategic attackers in a sequential defender–attacker game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(1), pages 262-272.
    20. Desheng Wu & David Olson, 2011. "Foreword," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 1-3, May.

    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:spr:annopr:v:237:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-014-1703-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.