Methods for Determining Optimal Mixed Strategies in Matrix Games with Correlated Random Payoffs
https://doi.org/10.22405/2226-8383-2023-24-4-33-47
Abstract
A game with nature for known state probabilities is considered. An optimality principle is proposed for decision-making for games with nature, based on efficiency and risk estimates.
In contrast to the traditional approach to the definition of a mixed strategy in game theory, this paper considers the possibility of correlation dependence of random payoff values for initial alternatives. Two variants of the implementation of the two-criteria approach to the definition of the optimality principle are suggested. The first option is to minimize the variance as a risk
estimate with a lower threshold on the mathematical expectation of the payoff. The second option is to maximize the mathematical expectation of the payoff with an upper threshold on the variance. Analytical solutions of both problems are obtained. The application of the obtained results on the example of the process of investing in the stock market is considered.
An investor, as a rule, does not form a portfolio all at once, but as a sequential process of purchasing one or another financial asset. In this case, the mixed strategy can be implemented in its immanent sense, i.e. purchases are made randomly with a distribution determined by the previously found optimal solution. If this process is long enough, then the portfolio structure
will approximately correspond to the type of mixed strategy. This approach of using the game with nature, taking into account the correlation dependence of random payoff of pure strategies, can also be applied to decision-making problems in other areas of risk management.
About the Authors
Victor Alexandrovich Gorelik
Federal Research Center “Informatics and Management” of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Moscow State Pedagogical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, professor
Tatiana Valerianovna Zolotova
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
doctor of physical and mathematical sciences, professor
References
1. Simon, H. A. 2013, “Administrative behavior”, Simon and Schuster, United States.
2. Wald, A. 2004, “Sequential analysis”, Courier Corporation, United States.
3. Samuelson, L. 2017, “Game theory in economics and beyond”, Voprosy Ekonomiki, vol. 13, pp.
4. -115. doi: 10.32609/0042-8736-2017-5-89-115
5. Allen, F., Morris, S. E. 2014, “Game theory models in Finance”, In: International Series in
6. Operations Research and Management Science, pp. 17-41, Springer, New York LLC.
7. Breton, M. 2018, “Dynamic Games in Finance”, In: Ba¸sar T., Zaccour G. (eds) Handbook of
8. Dynamic Game Theory, Springer, Cham.
9. Askari, G., Gordji, M. E., Park, C. 2019, “The behavioral model and game theory”, Palgrave
10. Communications, vol. 5, no. 15, pp. 1-8. doi: 10.1057/s41599-019-0265-2
11. Fox W.P., Burks R. 2019, “Game Theory”, Applications of Operations Research and Management
12. Science for Military Decision Making. International Series in Operations Research and
13. Management Science, vol. 283, Springer, Cham.
14. Allayarov, S. 2021, “Game Theory And Its Optimum Application For Solving Economic
15. Problems”, Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 3432-
16.
17. Jiang, Y., Zhou, K., Lu, X., Yang, S. 2020, “Electricity trading pricing among prosumers with
18. game theory-based model in energy blockchain environment”, Applied Energy, vol. 271, no.
19. doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115239
20. Lee, S., Kim, S., Choi, K., Shon, T. 2018, “Game theory-based security vulnerability
21. quantification for social internet of things”, Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 82, pp.
22. -760. doi: 10.1016/j.future.2017.09.032
23. Hafezalkotob, A., Mahmoudi, R., Hajisami, E., Wee, H. M. 2018, “Wholesale-retail pricing
24. strategies under market risk and uncertain demand in supply chain using evolutionary game
25. theory”, Kybernetes, vol. 47, no. 8, 1178-1201. doi: 10.1108/K-02-2017-0053
26. Piraveenan, M. 2019, “Applications of game theory in project management: a structured review and analysis”, Mathematics, vol. 7, no. 13, p. 858. doi: 10.3390/math7090858
27. Shafer, G., Vovk, V. 2019, “Game-Theoretic Foundations for Probability and Finance”, vol. 455, John Wiley and Sons, United States.
28. Wald, A. 1950, “Statistical Decision Functions”, Wiley, Oxford UK. doi: 10.2307/2333373
29. Hurwicz, L. 1951, “Optimality Criteria for Decision Making Under Ignorance”, Statistics, vol.
30.
31. Savage, L. J. 1951, “The Theory of Statistical Decision”, J. Am. Stat. Assoc, vol. 46, pp. 55-67.
32. Harman, R., Prus, M. 2018, “Computing optimal experimental designs with respect to a
33. compound Bayes risk criterion”, textitStatistics and Probability Letters, vol. 137, 135-141. doi:
34. 1016/j.spl.2018.01.017
35. Kuzmics, C. 2017, “AbrahamWald’s complete class theorem and Knightian uncertainty”, Games and Economic Behavior, vol. 104, 666-673. doi: 10.1016/j.geb.2017.06.012
36. Radner, R. 2015, “Decision and choice: bounded rationality”, International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), pp. 879-885, Elsevier, Florida United States.
37. Gorelik, V. A., Zolotova, T. V., 2019, “The optimality principle "mathematical expectationvar"
38. and its application in the Russian stock market”, Proceedings 12th International Conference
39. Management of Large-Scale System Development (IEEE Conference Publications). Moscow,
40. pp. 1-4. doi: 10.1109/MLSD.2019.8911018
41. Gorelik, V. A., Zolotova, T. V., 2020, “Risk management in stochastic problems of stock
42. investment and its application in the Russian Stock Market”, Proceedings 13th International
43. Conference Management of Large-Scale System Development (IEEE Conference Publications).
44. Moscow, pp. 1-5. doi: 10.1109/MLSD49919.2020.9247801
45. Zhukovsky, V. I., Kirichenko, M. M. 2016, “Risks and outcomes in a multicriteria problem with
46. uncertainty”, Risk Management, vol. 2, pp. 17-25.
47. Labsker, L. G. 2019, “The property of synthesizing the Wald-Savage criterion and its economic application”, Economics and Mathematical Methods, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 89-103. doi:10.31857/S042473880006775-1
48. Garc´ıa, F., Gonz´alez-Bueno, J. A., Oliver, J. 2015, “Mean-variance investment strategy applied in emerging financial markets: evidence from the Colombian stock market”, Intellectual
49. Economics, vol. 9, no. 15, pp. 22-29. doi: 10.1016/j.intele.2015.09.003
50. Xu, Y., Xiao, J., Zhang, L. 2020, “Global predictive power of the upside and downside variances of the U.S. equity market”, Economic Modelling, vol. 93, pp. 605-619.
51. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2020.09.006
52. Sharpe, W. F., Alexander, G. J., Bailey, J. V. 1999, Investments, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.doi: 10.4236/ajps.2019.103030
53. Investment company “FINAM”, Available at: https://www.finam.ru/ (accessed 5 March 2021).
Review
For citations:
Gorelik V.A., Zolotova T.V. Methods for Determining Optimal Mixed Strategies in Matrix Games with Correlated Random Payoffs. Chebyshevskii Sbornik. 2023;24(4):33-47. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22405/2226-8383-2023-24-4-33-47
Views:
548
Email this article 