MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of a simple capacity game

2011· article· en· W1980873550 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jingpu Song, Mahmut Parlar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Transactions in Operational Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSupply Chain and Inventory Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNash equilibriumLimit (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationSimple (philosophy)Mathematical economicsComputer scienceSensitivity (control systems)Best responseRevenueStrategyGame theoryMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study a two‐player two‐fare‐class static single‐period capacity allocation game with complete information. Nonnested (partitioned) booking limit policies are investigated in both noncooperative and cooperative situations. We show the existence of unique Nash equilibrium in the noncooperative situation. In the cooperative game, we analyze the cost saving of the two players and investigate the concavity of the objective function. For both noncooperative and cooperative settings, we assume the demands to be a truncated normal distribution and provide a comprehensive sensitivity analysis to discover the effects of unit revenue, rejection cost, and transfer rate on the equilibrium solution. Our numerical experiments show that the nonnested model can be a good approximation to the nested booking limit model. For the cooperative setting, we identify conditions that give rise to improvements in the total system revenue. Finally, under each game‐theoretic setting, we present the managerial implications of our solutions along with numerical examples.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.151 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Transactions in Operational ResearchSame topicSupply Chain and Inventory ManagementFrench-language works237,207