EXERCISE 1

In the company ABC several alternatives are presented to choose the best technology of four possible, whose performance de
adaptation of the workers who will manipulate the equipments that comprise it. The expected benefits of each alternative and
adaptation of the workers are given in the table, in millions of pesos ($). For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,7.

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275

According to Table 1 by applying the criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic criteria, Hurwicz and Savage determine
decision level according to the benefit criteria.

Laplace

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275
p(j) 1/5 1/5 1/5 1/5

For Laplace chose the Technology 1

Wald or pessimistic

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275

The worst situation of each technology

Chose the less worst
For Wald or pessimistic chose the Technology 3

Optimistic criteria

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275

The best situation of each technology

Chose the more best

For Optimistic Criteria chose the Technology 5

Hurwicz

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275

Alpha= 0.7
Pessimist Coeficient= 0.3

For Hurwicz chose the Technology 5

Savage

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 2118 2168 2213 2265
Technology 2 2109 2158 2158 2252
Technology 3 2145 2177 2177 2256
Technology 4 2130 2166 2166 2255
Technology 5 2128 2165 2165 2275

Profit matrix is ​transformed into opportunity cost matrix

Event
 Alternative Does not fit Fits acceptably Fits successfully Fits well
Technology 1 217 167 122 70
Technology 2 226 177 177 83
Technology 3 190 158 158 79
Technology 4 205 169 169 80
Technology 5 207 170 170 60

Maximum opportunity cost

The minimum opportunity cost

For Savage chose the Technology 5

ur possible, whose performance depends on the
ed benefits of each alternative and degree of
assume an alpha of 0,7.

Fits very well

2330
2328
2303
2322
2335

ria, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal

Fits very well VM

2330 2218.8
2328 2201.0
2303 2211.6
2322 2207.8
2335 2213.6
1/5

Fits very well

2330
2328
2303
2322
2335
Fits very well
2330
2328
2303
2322
2335

Fits very well

2330 2266.4
2328 2262.3
2303 2255.6
2322 2264.4
2335 2272.9

Fits very well

2330
2328
2303
2322
2335
Fits very well
5
7
32
13
0
 EXERCISE 2

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must plan its level of supply to satisfy the d
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 ca
680, 715 and 730 crates. There are therefore four levels of supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to r
costs, either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below shows the costs in hundreds of do
Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,75.

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 22443 2287

According to Table 2 by applying the criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic criteria, Hurwicz and Savage determine
decision level according to the benefit criteria.

Laplace

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 2243 2287
p(j) 1/5 1/5 1/5 1/5

For Laplace chose the e3

Wald or pessimistic

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 2243 2287

The worst situation of each technology

Chose the less worst

For Wald or pessimistic chose the E2

Optimistic criteria

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 2243 2287

The best situation of each technology

Chose the more best

For Optimistic Criteria chose the e1

Hurwicz

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 2243 2287

Alpha= 0.75
Pessimist Coeficient= 0.25

For Hurwicz chose the E2

Savage

Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 2109 2197 2236 2271
e2 (630) 2112 2152 2228 2281
e3 (680) 2137 2168 2240 2275
e4 (715) 2110 2176 2238 2286
e5 (730) 2136 2173 2243 2287

Cost matrix is ​transformed into opportunity cost matrix

 Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) 0 -45 -8 0
e2 (630) -3 0 0 -10
e3 (680) -28 -16 -12 -4
e4 (715) -1 -24 -10 -15
e5 (730) -27 -21 -15 -16

Maximum opportunity cost

The minimum opportunity cost

For Savage chose the e4

n its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its
expected to fall into one of five categories: 610, 630,
umber of hoppers is expected to result in additional
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For

e5 (730)
2332
2315
2317
2331
2329

ria, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal

e5 (730) VM
2332 2229.0
2315 2217.6
2317 2227.4
2331 2228.2
2329 2233.6
1/5

e5 (730)
2332
2315
2317
2331
2329
e5 (730)
2332
2315
2317
2331
2329

e5 (730)
2332 2164.75
2315 2162.75
2317 2182
2331 2165.25
2329 2184.25

e5 (730)
2332
2315
2317
2331
2329
e5 (730)
-17
0
-2
-16
-14
 EXERCISE 3

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must plan its level of supply to satisfy the d
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 ca
750, 790 and 830 crates. There are therefore four levels of supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to r
costs, either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below shows the costs in hundreds of do
Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,55.

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260

According to Table 2 by applying the criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic criteria, Hurwicz and Savage determine
decision level according to the benefit criteria.

Laplace

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260
p(j) 1/5 1/5 1/5 1/5

For Laplace chose the e1

Wald or pessimistic

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260

The worst situation of each technology

Chose the less worst

For Wald or pessimistic chose the E1

Optimistic criteria

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260

The best situation of each technology

Chose the more best

For Optimistic Criteria chose the e3

Hurwicz

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260

Alpha= 0.75
Pessimist Coeficient= 0.25

For Hurwicz chose the E2

Savage

Event
Alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790)
e1 (580) 1147 1152 1238 1283
e2 (720) 1109 1193 1222 1298
e3 (750) 1106 1181 1245 1281
e4 (790) 1134 1177 1249 1276
e5 (830) 1149 1197 1248 1260

Cost matrix is ​transformed into opportunity cost matrix

 Event
Alternative e1 (610) e2 (630) e3 (680) e4 (715)
e1 (610) -41 0 0 -23
e2 (630) -3 -41 16 -38
e3 (680) 0 -29 -7 -21
e4 (715) -28 -25 -11 -16
e5 (730) -43 -45 -10 0

Maximum opportunity cost

The minimum opportunity cost

For Savage chose the e2

n its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its
expected to fall into one of five categories: 580, 720,
umber of hoppers is expected to result in additional
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For

e5 (830)
1311
1314
1346
1349
1328

ria, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal

e5 (830) VM
1311 1226.2
1314 1227.2
1346 1231.8
1349 1237.0
1328 1236.4
1/5

e5 (830)
1311
1314
1346
1349
1328
e5 (830)
1311
1314
1346
1349
1328

e5 (830)
1311 1188
1314 1160.25
1346 1166
1349 1187.75
1328 1193.75

e5 (830)
1311
1314
1346
1349
1328
e5 (730)
0
-3
-35
-38
-17
 EXERCISE 4

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 27 33 38
Player 1
II 19 25 31

According to Table 4 find the value of the game by means of the graphical method applied to matrices
2 x n or m x 2.

B1 B2 B3
A1 27 33 38
A2 19 25 31

E1 x(27)+(1-x)19 --> 27x - 19x + 19 --> 8x + 19

E2 x(33)+(1-x)25 --> 33x - 25x + 25 --> 8x + 25
E3 x(38)+(1-x)31 --> 38x - 31x + 31 --> 7x + 31

y1 8x + 19
y2 8x + 25
y3 7x + 31

When x=0

y1 19
y2 25
y3 31

When x=1

y1 27
y2 33
y3 38

y1 y2 y3
x=1 27 33 38
x=0 19 25 31

y
 40 40 y3
39 39
38 38
37 37
36 36 y2
35 35
34 34
33 33
32 32
31 31
30 30 y1
29 29
28 28
27 27
26 26
25 25
24 24
23 23
22 22
21 R 21
20 20
19 19
18 18
x
0 1

y1 8x + 19
0= 8x + 19
Player 1 19= 8x
solution 2,375= x

Game Value V0 8(2,375) + 19

V0 38

Optimus (2,375 , 38)

strategy

To the second player

Delete the Y1 column

27 33 38
19 25 31
33 38 a b
=
25 31 c d

q= d-c
a-b-c+d
q= 31-25
33-38-25+31
q=6
1-q = -5
 EXERCISE 5

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 27 33
Player 1 II 19 25
III 33 37

According to Table 5, find the value of the game by means of the graphical method applied to
matrices 2 x n or m x 2.

B1 B2
A1 27 33 -6
A2 19 25 -6
A3 33 37 -4

E1 x(27)+(1-x)33 --> 27x - 33x + 33 --> - 6x + 33

E2 x(19)+(1-x)25 --> 19x - 25x + 25 --> - 6x + 25
E3 x(33)+(1-x)37 --> 33x - 37x + 37 --> - 4x + 37

y1 - 6x + 33
y2 - 6x + 25
y3 - 4x + 37

When x=0

y1 33
y2 25
y3 37

When x=1

y1 27
y2 19
y3 33

y1 y2 y3
x=1 27 19 33
x=0 33 25 37
 y

40 40
39 39
38 38
37 37
36 36
35 35
34 34
33 33
32 32 y3
31 31
30 30
29 29
28 28
27 27
26 26 y1
25 25
24 24
23 23
22 22
21 21
R
20 20
19 19
18 18 y2
x
0 1

y2 - 6x + 25
0= - 6x + 25
Player 1 25= - 6x
solution -4.33 x

Game Value V0 - 6(4,33) + 25

V0 -0.98

Optimus (-4,33 , -0,98)

strategy