Bicriterion differential games with qualitative outcomes (Q915665): Difference between revisions

From MaRDI portal
Import240304020342 (talk | contribs)
Set profile property.
ReferenceBot (talk | contribs)
Changed an Item
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Combat games / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Analysis of a combat problem: the turret game / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: A two-target game analysis in line-of-sight coordinates / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Qualitative analysis of secured outcome regions for two-target games / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Two-target pursuit-evasion differential games in the plane / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Capturability in a two-target 'game of two cars' / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Formulation and analysis of combat problems as zero-sum bicriterion differential games / rank
 
Normal rank
Property / cites work
 
Property / cites work: Multicriterion differential games with applications to combat problems / rank
 
Normal rank

Revision as of 09:33, 21 June 2024

scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
Bicriterion differential games with qualitative outcomes
scientific article

    Statements

    Bicriterion differential games with qualitative outcomes (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    1991
    0 references
    Combat games are studied as bicriteria differential games with qualitative outcomes determined by threshold values on the criterion functions. Survival and capture strategies of the players are defined using the notion of security levels. Closest approach survival strategies (CASS) and minimum risk capture strategies (MRCS) are important strategies for the players identified as solutions to four optimization problems involving security levels. These are used, in combination with the preference orderings of the qualitative outcomes by the players, to delineate the win regions and the secured draw and mutual kill regions for the players. It is shown that the secured draw regions and the secured mutual kill regions for the two players are not necessarily the same. Simple illustrative examples are given.
    0 references
    0 references
    Combat games
    0 references
    bicriteria differential games
    0 references
    qualitative outcomes
    0 references
    Survival and capture strategies
    0 references
    security levels
    0 references