MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392498792 · doi:10.1002/mde.4150

Game‐theoretic approaches to product introduction strategies for durable products

2024· article· en· W4392498792 on OpenAlexaff
Davood Pirayesh Neghab, Jorge Restrepo Diaz, Mücahit Çevik, M.I.M. Wahab

Bibliographic record

VenueManagerial and Decision Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCapital Investment and Risk Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStackelberg competitionCournot competitionDuopolyValuation (finance)Competitor analysisEconomicsMicroeconomicsBertrand competitionVolatility (finance)Subgame perfect equilibriumGame theoryComputer scienceIndustrial organizationEconometricsOligopoly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract New product demand continuously fluctuates throughout the life of the product. As a result, markets typically experience high volatility. Most companies operate in highly competitive industries where the product volume supplied by the competitors significantly affects production plans. These conditions necessitate companies to be flexible and rapidly adapt to such volatility. In this study, we investigate the product introduction strategies under two microeconomic theories: real‐option valuation and game theory. Specifically, we develop a real‐option valuation framework with a flexible capacity based on two game‐theoretic models, namely, Stackelberg and Cournot, in a duopoly market where competitors have either perfect or imperfect information. Furthermore, we construct a lattice to discretize the demand evolution and adopt a regime‐switching approach to characterize the stochastic product lifetime. We conduct an extensive numerical study and compare net present values (NPVs) and optimal capacities obtained from the game‐theoretic models. Our results show that under perfect information, the Stackelberg competition generates more supply with lower prices and less total than the Cournot competition. Moreover, we find that, compared to the fixed‐capacity system, the flexible capacity system increases the in the Stackelberg game (by 5.5%) more than in the Cournot game (by 3.3%). We provide further results on the performance of the companies based on detailed sensitivity analysis for various model parameters. In particular, we observe that fixed and variable production and installation costs majorly impact capacity allocation decisions and profits.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.831

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.156 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagerial and Decision EconomicsSame topicCapital Investment and Risk AnalysisFrench-language works237,207