China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Multi-objective optimization with genetic algorithm, fuzzy logic and game theory
Published in Franklin Y. Cheng, Kevin Z. Truman, Structural Optimization, 2017
Franklin Y. Cheng, Kevin Z. Truman
Game theory was developed for both cooperative and non-cooperative games. Cooperative games are those in which participants have the opportunity to communicate with one another and to form binding and enforceable agreements. In non-cooperative games, each player acts independently in an effort to maximize his/her own pay-off, which produces an outcome that may be favourable for one player but unfavourable for another. The concept of player cooperation therefore becomes important when considering compromise game outcomes. The measurement of success of cooperative play is embodied in the concept of the Pareto optimum; a Pareto optimum has the property that if any other solution is used, at least one player does worse or they all do the same. A cooperative game theory consists of ways to analyze conflicts existing in objectives or interest groups (players), to provide a neutral forum for discussion and negotiations among players, and then to suggest a compromise solution acceptable to all players.
Optimal equity structure of PPP projects when private-sector shareholders’ “investor-contractor” dual roles is considered
Published in Construction Management and Economics, 2023
Xiuqin Wang, Shufan Wang, Ying Gao
Game theory primarily studies the process of decision-making interaction between two or more parties and can be divided into cooperative and non-cooperative games, depending on whether binding agreements can be reached. Cooperative games explore how individuals can share the benefits of cooperation when they collaborate. The cooperative approach can enhance the interests of both parties because cooperative games can generate a cooperative surplus. This surplus arises from the relationship between the parties and is constrained by it. The distribution of the cooperative surplus among the parties depends on the power contrast and skill application of the parties. Therefore, all parties in the game will engage in bargaining and reach a consensus to cooperate (Montet and Serra 2003, Dow 2010).
Does Playing Cooperative Mobile Games Facilitate Social Interaction and Positive Affect in Middle Childhood?
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2022
Ayse Busra Iplikci, Gul Gunaydin, Emre Selcuk, Yavuz Eren, Lindon Krasniqi
We aimed to test whether the benefits of cooperative games would extend to mobile gaming because the relative ease of carrying mobile devices might make mobile games a more convenient tool for engaging in spontaneous cooperative gameplay in larger groups in daily life. A prior study observing and interviewing individuals who played multiplayer games revealed that mobile gaming offered both advantages and disadvantages for social interactions (Szentgyorgyi et al., 2008). On the one hand, mobile devices encouraged face-to-face seating configurations—as opposed to sitting next to one another in front of a screen as is typical of computer games. Mobile gaming also allowed players to move around more freely to interact with their peers—as opposed to sitting in the same spot as is typical of computer games. Face-to-face seating arrangements coupled with greater mobility have the potential to facilitate social exchanges during mobile gaming. On the other hand, in the same study, players also reported that the lack of a shared screen in mobile gaming might undermine the social aspect of the gaming experience. If players concentrate on their own devices and role in the game, “private gaming spheres” might emerge, which in turn might limit social exchanges. Mobile gaming also allowed players to sit at a greater distance from one another—as opposed to players squeezing next to one another in front of a shared computer screen. The cooperative cooking game designed for the present study prevented the emergence of private gaming spheres by creating complementary roles (cutting, mixing, sautéing, and reading aloud recipes) that required interacting with other players. The interdependent nature of cooperative gaming contributes to greater social engagement and game enjoyment, especially when players assume complementary roles (El-Nasr et al., 2010; Harris & Hancock, 2019). Additionally, interactions that required two screens to be in close proximity (e.g., transferring ingredients from one player’s cutting board to another player’s bowl) ensured physical proximity. Thus, we expected that the potential advantages of mobile gaming would outweigh the disadvantages when playing the cooperative game. The proposition that cooperative gaming allows reaping social-interactive benefits of mobile gaming without incurring its costs is also consistent with the General Learning Model (Buckley & Anderson, 2006) which suggests that playing cooperative games would increase positive social interactions during gameplay by increasing the accessibility of cooperation-related positive cognitions and feelings. Therefore, we predicted that: