PHASE 4 - SOLVE PROBLEMS BY APPLYING THE ALGORITHMS OF THE UNIT 2

PRESENTED TO:

PAULA ANDREA CARVAJAL

Tutor

DELIVERED BY:

ZAIRAVERGARA ACOSTA
Código: 80720598

Grupo: 212066_17

UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL ABIERTA Y A DISTANCIA – UNAD

BARRANCABERMEJA 2018
Problem 1. Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage criteria
(Profit Matrix):

In the company ABC several alternatives are presented to choose the best technology of
four possible, whose performance depends on the adaptation of the workers who will
manipulate the equipments that comprise it. The expected benefits of each alternative and
degree of adaptation of the workers are given in the table, in millions of pesos ($). For
Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,6.

Event
Fits Fits
Fits very
Alternative Does not fit acceptabl successfull Fits well
well
y y
Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335
Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

Laplace Criteria
5
1
Expected value = ∗ ∑ Rj
5
j=1

(1/5) (1/5) (1/5) (1/5) (1/5)

Does not Fits Fits Fits very
Fits well EV
fit acceptably successfully well
Technology
1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1236
1
Technology
1350 1260 1260 1245 1200 1263
2
Technology
1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1305
3
Technology
1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1311
4
Technology
1335 1320 1335 1365 1410 1353
5

Criteria of Wald (pessimistic)

Does not Fits Fits Fits very

Fits well Results
fit acceptably successfully well
Technology
1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1140
1
Technology
1350 1260 1260 1245 1200 1200
2
Technology
1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1200
3
Technology
1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1275
4
Technology
1335 1320 1335 1365 1410 1320
5
Max 1320

Criteria of Wald (optimistic)

Does not Fits Fits Fits very

Fits well Results
fit acceptably successfully well
Technology
1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1335
1
Technology
1350 1260 1260 1245 1200 1350
2
Technology
1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1380
3
Technology
1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1365
4
Technology
1335 1320 1335 1365 1410 1410
5
Max 1410

Criteria of Hurwicz

Optimistic Coefficient (a): 0.6

Expected value = {MaxRij ∗ a + minRij ∗ (1 − a)}

A1 = 1335 ∗ 0,60 + 1185 ∗ (1 − 0,60) = 1257

A2 = 1350 ∗ 0,60 + 1200 ∗ (1 − 0,60) = 1290
A3 = 1380 ∗ 0,60 + 1200 ∗ (1 − 0,60) = 1308
A4 = 1365 ∗ 0,60 + 1275 ∗ (1 − 0,60) = 1329
A5 = 1410 ∗ 0,60 + 1320 ∗ (1 − 0,60) = 1374
Does not Fits Fits Fits very
Fits well EV
fit acceptably successfully well
Technology
1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1257
1
Technology
1350 1260 1260 1245 1200 1290
2
Technology
1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1308
3
Technology
1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1329
4
Technology
1335 1320 1335 1365 1410 1374
5
Max 1374

Criteria of Savage (Cost matrix)

Fits Fits
Does not Fits very
acceptabl successfu Fits well EV
fit well
y lly
 (1365- (1320- (1335- (1365- (1410-
Technology
1140) 1185) 1140) 1290) 1335) 225
1
225 135 105 75 75
(1365- (1320- (1335- (1365- (1410-
Technology
1350) 1260) 1260) 1245) 1200) 210
2
15 60 75 120 210
(1365- (1320- (1335- (1365- (1410-
Technology
1200) 1275) 1320) 1350) 1380) 165
3
165 45 15 15 30
(1365- (1320- (1335- (1365- (1410-
Technology
1365) 1320) 1305) 1290) 1275) 135
4
0 0 30 75 135
(1365- (1320- (1335- (1365- (1410-
Technology
1335) 1185) 1335) 1365) 1410) 30
5
30 0 0 0 0
Min 30

Acccording to all criteria, the technology that must be applied is technology 5

Problem 2. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage

(Cost matrix):

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its customers in the day of love and
friendship. The exact number of crates is not known, but is expected to fall into one of five
categories: 510, 620, 650, 710 and 730 crates. There are therefore four levels of supply.
The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs, either
due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below shows
the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,65.
Laplace Criteria
5
1
Expected value = ∗ ∑ Rj
5
j=1

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 2003,6
e2(720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 2043,2
e3(750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 1992,2
e4(790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 1982
e5(830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 2028,2
MIN 1982
According to his criteria, the best option is e4

Criteria of Wald (pessimistic)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 2561
e2(720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 2645
e3(750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 2406
e4(790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 2374
e5(830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 2473
MIN 2374
According to his criteria, the best option is e4
Criteria of Wald (optimistic)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 1571
e2(720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 1515
e3(750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 1554
e4(790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 1370
e5(830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 1451
MIN 1370
According to his criteria, the best option is e4

Criteria of Hurwicz

Optimistic Coefficient (a): 0.6

Expected value = {MaxRij ∗ a + minRij ∗ (1 − a)}

A1 = 2561 ∗ 0,65 + 1571 ∗ (1 − 0,65) = 2214,5

A2 = 2645 ∗ 0,65 + 1515 ∗ (1 − 0,65) = 2249,5
A3 = 2406 ∗ 0,65 + 1554 ∗ (1 − 0,65) = 2107,8
A4 = 1370 ∗ 0,65 + 1370 ∗ (1 − 0,65) = 2022,6
A5 = 2250 ∗ 0,60 + 1451 ∗ (1 − 0,65) = 2115,3

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 2214,5
e2(720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 2249,5
e3(750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 2107,8
e4(790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 2022,6
e5(830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 2115,3
MIN 2022,6

According to his criteria, the best option is e4

Criteria of Savage (Cost matrix)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
(1571- (1620- (2065- (2201- (2561-
e1(580) 1370) 1620) 2005) 2192) 2374) 201
201 0 60 9 187
(1515- (1859- (2005- (2192- (2645-
e2(720) 1370) 1620) 2005) 2192) 2374) 271
145 239 0 0 271
(1554- (1669- (2115- (2217- (2406-
e3(750) 1370) 1620) 2005) 2192) 2374) 184
184 49 110 25 32
(1370- (1809- (2062- (2295- (2374-
e4(790) 1370) 1620) 2005) 2192) 2374) 189
0 189 57 103 0
(1451- (1867- (2100- (2250- (2473-
e5(830) 1370) 1620) 2005) 2192) 2374) 247
81 247 95 58 99
Min 184

According to his criteria, the best option is e3

Problem 3. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage

(Cost matrix):
A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its customers in the day of love and
friendship. The exact number of crates is not known, but is expected to fall into one of five
categories: 580, 720, 750, 790 and 830 crates. There are therefore four levels of supply.
The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs, either
due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below shows
the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,55.
Laplace Criteria
5
1
Expected value = ∗ ∑ Rj
5
j=1

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 1049,2
e2(720) 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 1025,4
e3(750) 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1105,4
e4(790) 1019 932 1200 1032 932 1023
e5(830) 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 1064,2
MIN 1023
According to his criteria, the best option is e4

Criteria of Wald (pessimistic)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 1144
e2(720) 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 1175
e3(750) 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1182
e4(790) 1019 932 1200 1032 932 1200
e5(830) 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 1200
MIN 1144
According to his criteria, the best option is e1

Criteria of Wald (optimistic)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 982
e2(720) 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 857
e3(750) 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1044
e4(790) 1019 932 1200 1032 932 932
e5(830) 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 894
MIN 857
According to his criteria, the best option is e2

Criteria of Hurwicz

Optimistic Coefficient (a): 0.6

Expected value = {MaxRij ∗ a + minRij ∗ (1 − a)}

A1 = 1144 ∗ 0,55 + 982 ∗ (1 − 0,55) = 1071,1

A2 = 1175 ∗ 0,55 + 857 ∗ (1 − 0,55) = 1031,9
A3 = 1182 ∗ 0,55 + 1044 ∗ (1 − 0,55) = 1119,9
A4 = 1200 ∗ 0,55 + 932 ∗ (1 − 0,55) = 1079,4
A5 = 1200 ∗ 0,55 + 894 ∗ (1 − 0,55) = 1062,3

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
e1(580) 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 1071,1
e2(720) 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 1031,9
e3(750) 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1119,9
e4(790) 1019 932 1200 1032 932 1079,4
e5(830) 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 1062,3
Min 1031,9
According to his criteria, the best option is e2

Criteria of Savage (Cost matrix)

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830) EV
Alternative
(1144- (1019- (1032- (1069-
e1(580) 1007) (982-932) 857) 1019) 932) 162
137 50 162 13 137
(1175- (1019- (1019- (1057-
e2(720) 1007) 932) (857-857) 1019) 932) 168
168 87 0 0 125
(1069- (1138- (1044- (1094- (1182-
e3(750) 1007) 932) 857) 1019) 932) 250
62 206 187 75 250
(1019- (1200- (1032-
(932-932)
e4(790) 1007) (932-932) 857) 1019) 343
12 0 343 13 0
(1007- (1032- (1188- (1200-
e5(830) 1007) 932) (894-857) 1019) 932) 268
0 100 37 169 268
Min 162
According to his criteria, the best option is e1

Problem 4. Game Theory method:

Graphical solutions are only applicable to games in which at least one of the players has
only two strategies. Consider the following 2 x n game:

Player 2
Strategy
A B C
I 25 33 29
Player 1
II 32 27 29

Table 4. Theory of games 2 x n

 SOLUTION

COLUMN PLAYER:

Strategy A

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 25P1 + 32P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 25P1 + 32(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 25P1 + 32 − 32P1

V esperado = −7P1 + 32

Strategy B

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 33P1 + 27P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 33P1 + 27(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 33P1 + 27 − 27P1

V esperado = 6P1 + 27

Strategy C

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 29P1 + 29P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 29P1 + 29(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 29P1 + 29 − 29P1

V esperado = 0P1 + 29
For strategy A

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 25
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 32

For strategy B

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 33
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 27

For strategy C

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 29
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 29

After A and B

V esperado = −7P1 + 32 strategy A

V esperado = 6P1 + 27 strategy B

−7P1 + 32 = 6P1 + 27

32 − 27 = 6P1 +7P1

5 = 13P1
 5/13 = P1

0,3846 = P1

P2 = 1 − P1 = 1 − 0,3846

P2 = 0,6154

VALUE OF THE GAME

V esperado = 6P1 + 27

5
V esperado = 6 (13) + 27

381
V esperado = 13

V esperado = 29,30

This means that, if both players determine the probabilities of actions of each of their
strategies, both will have the possibility of winning 381/13. This will then represent a
balanced game.

THE ROW PLAYER

Strategy 1

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 33Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 33(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 25Q1 + 32 − 32Q1

V esperado = −8Q1 + 33

Strategy 2

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = −4Q1 + 29

Strategy 3

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 32Q1 + 27Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 32Q1 + 27(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 32Q1 + 27 − 27Q1

V esperado = 5Q1 + 27

Strategy 4

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 32Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 32Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 32Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = 3Q1 + 29

Strategy 5
Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 33Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 33Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 33Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = 4Q1 + 29

Strategy 6

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 27Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 27Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 27Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = −2Q1 + 29

For strategy 1

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 25
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 33

For strategy 2

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 25
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

For strategy 3

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 32
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 27
For strategy 4

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 32
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

For strategy 5

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 33
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

For strategy 6

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 27
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

After 1 and 3

V esperado = −8Q1 + 33 strategy 1

V esperado = 5Q1 + 27 strategy 3

−8Q1 + 33 = 5Q1 + 27

33 − 27 = 5Q1 +8Q1

6 = 13Q1

6/13 = Q1

0,461538 = Q1

Q2 = 1 − Q1 = 1 − 6/13
 Q2 = 0,538462

VALUE OF THE GAME

V esperado = 5Q1 + 27

6
V esperado = 5 (13) + 27

381
V esperado = 13

V esperado = 29,30

This means that, if both players determine the probabilities of actions of each of their
strategies, both will have the possibility of winning 381/13. This will then represent a
balanced game.

Problem 5. Game Theory method:

Graphical solutions are only applicable to games in which at least one of the players has
only two strategies. Consider the following game m x 2:

Player 2
Strategy
A B
I 23 31
Player 1 II 29 25
III 26 29

Table 5. Game Theory m x 2

SOLUTION

THE ROW PLAYER

Strategy I

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 23P1 + 31P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 23P1 + 31(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 23P1 + 31 − 31P1

V esperado = −8P1 + 31

Strategy II

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 29P1 + 25P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 29P1 + 25(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 29P1 + 25 − 25P1

V esperado = 4P1 + 25
Strategy III

P1 + P2 = 1

V esperado = 26P1 + 29P2 Como P1 + P2 = 1 P2 = 1 − P1

V esperado = 26P1 + 29(1 − P1 )

V esperado = 26P1 + 29 − 29P1

V esperado = −3P1 + 29
For strategy I

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 23
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 31

For strategy II

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 29
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 25

For strategy III

Si P1 = 1 Ve = 26
Si P1 = 0 Ve = 29

After A and B

V esperado = −8P1 + 31 strategy I

V esperado = 4P1 + 25 strategy II

−8P1 + 31 = 4P1 + 25

31 − 25 = 4P1 +8P1

6 = 12P1

6/12 = P1

0,5 = P1

P2 = 1 − P1 = 1 − 0,5
 P2 = 0,5

VALUE OF THE GAME

V esperado = 4P1 + 25

6
V esperado = 4 (12) + 25

324
V esperado = 12

V esperado = 27

This means that, if both players determine the probabilities of actions of each of their
strategies, both will have the possibility of winning 324/12. This will then represent a
balanced game.

COLUMN PLAYER:

Strategy 1

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 23Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 23Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 23Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = −6Q1 + 29

Strategy 2

Q1 + Q 2 = 1
V esperado = 23Q1 + 26Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 23Q1 + 26(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 23Q1 + 26 − 26Q1

V esperado = −3Q1 + 26

Strategy 3

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 31Q1 + 25Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 31Q1 + 25(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 31Q1 + 25 − 25Q1

V esperado = 6Q1 + 25

Strategy 4

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 31Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 31Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 31Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = 2Q1 + 29

Strategy 5

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 29Q1 + 26Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 29Q1 + 26(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 29Q1 + 26 − 26Q1

V esperado = 3Q1 + 26
Strategy 6

Q1 + Q 2 = 1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29Q2 Como Q1 + Q2 = 1 Q 2 = 1 − Q1

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29(1 − Q1 )

V esperado = 25Q1 + 29 − 29Q1

V esperado = −4Q1 + 29

For strategy 1

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 23
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

For strategy 2

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 23
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 26

For strategy 3

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 31
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 25

For strategy 4

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 31
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

For strategy 5
Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 29
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 26

For strategy 6

Si Q1 = 1 Ve = 25
Si Q1 = 0 Ve = 29

After 1 and 3

V esperado = −6Q1 + 29 strategy 1

V esperado = 6Q1 + 25 strategy 3

−6Q1 + 29 = 6Q1 + 25

29 − 25 = 6Q1 +6Q1

4 = 12Q1

4/12 = Q1

0,333333 = Q1

Q2 = 1 − Q1 = 1 − 4/12

Q2 = 0,666666

VALUE OF THE GAME

V esperado = 6Q1 + 25
 4
V esperado = 6 (12) + 25

324
V esperado = 12

V esperado = 27

This means that, if both players determine the probabilities of actions of each of their
strategies, both will have the possibility of winning 324/12. This will then represent a
balanced game.

Problem 6. Optimum solution of two-person games:

The games represent the latest case of lack of information where intelligent opponents
are working in a conflicting environment. The result is that a very conservative criterion is
generally proposed to solve sets of two people and sum zero, called minimax - maximin
criterion. To determine a fair game, the minimax = maximin, it is necessary to solve the
stable strategy through the Solver.

Table 6. Mixed strategies

SOLUTION WITH SOLVER

 BIBLIOGRAFIA

Joyce, J. (1999). The Foundations of Causal Decision Theory. Camdridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN
=228167&lang=es&site=eds-live

Prisner, E. (2014). Game Theory. Washington, District of Columbia, USA:

Mathematical Association of America Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN
=800654&lang=es&site=eds-live

Owen, G. (2013). Game Theory: Monterey, California, USA: Naval Postgraduate

School Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.co
m/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=525603&lang=es&site=ehost-live

Abdi, M. (2003). A design strategy for reconfigurable manufacturing systems

(RMSs) using analytical hierarchical process (AHP): a case study: Manchester,
UK: International Journal of Production Research. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=
10149095&lang=es&site=eds-live