UNIDAD 2: FASE 4- SOLVE PROBLEMS BY APPLYING THE ALGORITHMS

PARTICIPANTES
RAUL ALFREDO PAZ
FRANCY LORENA VARGAS
DUFRANY SANCHEZ

GRUPO:
212066_42
TUTOR
RICARDO JAVIER PINEDA

CURSO
TEORIA DE LAS DECISIONES

UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL ABIERTA Y A DISTANCIA UNAD

PROGRAMA: INGENIERIA INDUSTRIAL
NEIVA - HUILA.
OCTUBRE 2018
 2. Tabla de Contenido
3. Objectives of the activity ………………………………………………………………1
4. Development of Activities ……………………………………………………………....3
5. Conclusions............................................................................................................ 9
6. List of references ……………………………………………………………………….12
 3. Objetives

Differentiate the algorithms, their characteristics and application in different risk

environments and/or uncertainty, for the taking of decisions and the optimization of the
expected results.
 INTRODUCTION

All the work done in a company or business must have an analysis in order to make the
best decision that gives us the security that we will have the best result.

That is why in the present work we will be putting into practice different methods to make
decisions, in order to understand them, but the most important thing is to put them into
practice in our professional life.

Making the right decision depends on the success or failure of a project, in our
professional life we will have to face confrontation to analyze and make the best
decision, what we can analyze will depend much on the outcome of all.

They are methods that with figures gives us a clear picture of the event we are facing
and with results shown we can make the best decision.
 Activities to develop
APORTES DE RAUL ALFREDO PAZ
Problem 1. Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage criteria
(Profit Matrix):
In the company ABC several alternatives are presented to choose the best technology
of four possible, whose performance depends on the adaptation of the workers who will
manipulate the equipments that comprise it. The expected benefits of each alternative
and degree of adaptation of the workers are given in the table, in millions of pesos ($).
For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,6.

Event
Fits Fits Fits very
Alternative Does not fit Fits well
acceptably successfully well
Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335
Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

Table 1. Profit matrix

1. Laplace
Plantea la utilizacion de todos los valores que se han obtenio anteriormente. La logica
aplica al asignar a cada valor la misma probabilidad (1/n) estando todos en igualdad de
condiciones
Event
Fits
Fits Fits very
Alternative Does not fit successfull Fits well Avarege
acceptably well
y
Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1236
1263
Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1305
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1311
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410 1353

Segun este metodo utilizamos la tecnologia quien tuvo un promedio de 1353

 2. Wald
Utilizando el modelo de Wald que dice, que se debe escoger las peores, su filosofía es,
“la mejor de las peores.
Entonces escogemos la peor de cada uno
Tecnology 1
1140
Tecnology 2
1200
Tecnology 3
1200
Tecnology 4
1275
Tecnology 5
1320
En este caso la mejor de las peores en la tecnología 5, siendo la que vamos a escoger
por método de Wald
3. Optimistic
En este método se espera de cada alternativa escoger la mejor y luego escoger la
mejor de estas

Fits Fits Fits very

Alternative Does not fit Fits well Maxim
acceptably successfully well

Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335 1335

1350
Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200

Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380 1380

Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275 1365

1410
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

En este caso por este método escogeremos la Tecnología 5 con un valor de 1410
 4. Savage
Tomamos el máximo valor de cada estado
Fits Fits
Fits very
Does not fit acceptabl successfull Fits well
well
y y
1365 1320 1335 1365 1410

Fits
Does not Fits Fits very Pesimist
Alternative successfull Fits well
fit acceptably well a
y
Technology
225 135 105 75 75 75
1
Technology
15 60 75 120 210 15
2
Technology
165 45 15 15 30 15
3
Technology
0 0 30 75 135 0
4
Technology
30 0 0 0 0 0
5

Tomando el mejor dentro de los pesimistas tomamos la tecnología 1

5. Metodo de Hurwicz
En este modelo utilizamos dos variables la mas baja y la mas alta, para la mas baja da
un valor 1- α, y para la mas alta otorga un valor valor de α, donde α, es valor de
optimismo que damos
Tecnology 1
1140*(1-0.6) + 1335*0.6 =
1140*(0.4) + 1335*0.6 =
456 + 801= 1257
Tecnology 2
1200*(1-0.6) + 1350*0.6=
1200*(0.4) + 1350*0.6=
480 + 810 = 1290
Tecnology 3
1200*(1-0.6) + 1380*0.6=
1200*(0.4) + 1380*0.6=
480 + 828 = 1308
Tecnology 4
1275*(1-0.6) + 1365*0.6=
1275*(0.4) + 1365*0.6=
510 + 819= 1329
Tecnology 5
1320*(1-0.6) + 1365*0.6=
1320*(0.4) + 1365*0.6=
528 + 819 = 1347

Para este caso se escogería la tecnología 5, pues aplicando el modelo de Hurwicz es el

valor más alto
Problem 2. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and
Savage (Cost matrix):
A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its 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 categories: 510, 620, 650, 710 and 730 crates. There are therefore four levels of
supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional
costs, either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table
below shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an
alpha of 0,65.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1184 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2(720) 1112 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3(750) 1271 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4(790) 1145 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5(830) 1185 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473
 Table 2. Cost matrix
1. Laplace

Plantea la utilizacion de todos los valores que se han obtenio anteriormente. La logica
aplica al asignar a cada valor la misma probabilidad (1/n) estando todos en igualdad de
condiciones

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 Avarage
e1 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 2004
e2 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 2043
e3 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 1992
e4 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 1982
e5 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 2028

En este caso la mejor opcion es e2 con un resultado de 2043

2. Wald
Utilizando el modelo de Wald que dice, que se debe escoger las peores, su filosofía es,
“la mejor de las peores.

Entonces escogemos la peor de cada uno

E1=1571
E2=1515
E3=1554
E4=1370
E5=1451
A lo último debemos escoger la mejor de las peores, que en este caso es la e1
3. Optimistic
En este método se espera de cada alternativa escoger la mejor y luego escoger la
mejor de estas

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 Maxim
e1 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561 2561
e2 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645 2645
e3 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406 2406
e4 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374 2374
e5 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473 2473
En este caso la mejor opción es la e2
4. Hurwicz
En este modelo utilizamos dos variables la mas baja y la mas alta, para la mas baja da
un valor 1- α, y para la mas alta otorga un valor valor de α, donde α, es valor de
optimismo que damos
E1
1571*(1-0.65) + 2561*0.65 =
1571*(0.35) + 2561*0.65 =
550 + 1664= 2214
E2
1515*(1-0.65) + 2645*0.65=
1515*(0.35) + 2645*0.65=
530 + 2645 = 3175
E3
1554*(1-0.65) + 2406*0.65=
1554*(0.35) + 2406*0.65=
544 + 1564 = 2108
E4
1370*(1-0.65) + 2374*0.65=
1370*(0.35) + 2374*0.65=
479 + 1543= 2022
E5
1451*(1-0.65) + 2473*0.65=
1451*(0.35) + 2473*0.65=
508 + 1607 = 2115

Por este método la mejor opción para tomar la decisión es la e2 con un resultado de
3175
 5. Savage
Tomamos el máximo valor de cada estado

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5
1571 1867 2115 2295 2645

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 Pesimista
e1 0 247 50 94 84 50
e2 56 8 110 103 0 8
e3 17 198 0 78 239 17
e4 201 58 53 0 271 53
e5 120 0 15 45 172 15

Según este método la mejor opción sería e2

Problem 3. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and
Savage (Cost matrix):
A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its 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 categories: 580, 720, 750, 790 and 830 crates. There are therefore four levels of
supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional
costs, either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table
below shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an
alpha of 0,55.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1088 1144 982 1019 1032 1069
e2(720) 982 1175 1019 857 1019 1057
e3(750) 1019 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182
e4(790) 957 1019 932 1200 1032 932
e5(830) 1044 1007 1032 894 1188 1200
Table 3. Cost matrix
 1. Laplace
Plantea la utilizacion de todos los valores que se han obtenio anteriormente. La logica
aplica al asignar a cada valor la misma probabilidad (1/n) estando todos en igualdad de
condiciones

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 Avarage
e1 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 1049
e2 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 1025
e3 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1105
e4 1019 932 1200 1032 932 1023
e5 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 1064

Segun este metodo la major opcion es la e3

2. Wald
Utilizando el modelo de Wald que dice, que se debe escoger las peores, su filosofía es,
“la mejor de las peores.
Entonces escogemos la peor de cada uno
E1=982
E2=857
E3=1044
E4=932
E5=894
A lo último debemos escoger la mejor de las peores, que en este caso es la e3
3. Optimistic
En este método se espera de cada alternativa escoger la mejor y luego escoger la
mejor de estas
e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 Maxim

e1 1144 982 1019 1032 1069 1144

e2 1175 1019 857 1019 1057 1175

e3 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182 1182

e4 1019 932 1200 1032 932 1200

e5 1007 1032 894 1188 1200 1200

La mejor opción para este modelo es la e3
4. Hurwicz
En este modelo utilizamos dos variables la mas baja y la mas alta, para la mas baja da
un valor 1- α, y para la mas alta otorga un valor valor de α, donde α, es valor de
optimismo que damos
E1
982*(1-0.55) + 1069*0.55 =
982*(0.45) + 1069*0.55 =
442 + 588= 1030
E2
857*(1-0.55) + 1175*0.55=
857*(0.45) + 1175*0.55=
385 + 646 = 1031
E3
1044*(1-0.55) + 1182*0.55=
1044*(0.45) + 1182*0.55=
470 + 650 = 1120
E4
932*(1-0.55) + 1200*0.55=
932*(0.45) + 1200*0.55=
419 + 660= 1079
E5
894*(1-0.55) + 1200*0.55=
894*(0.45) + 1200*0.55=
402 + 660 = 1062
Por este método la mejor opción es la e3
 5. Modelo de Savage
Tomamos el máximo valor de cada estado

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5
1175 1138 1200 1188 1200

Empezamos a restas a estos números cada uno de las alternativas

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 Pesimista
31 156 181 156 131 31
0 119 343 169 143 0
106 0 156 94 18 0
156 206 0 156 268 0
168 106 306 0 0 0

Dentro de las pesimistas utilizamos criterio Maxmin seria 31 entonces deberíamos

escoger la alternativa 1
Problem 4. Game Theory method:

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
Player I 25 33 29
1 II 32 27 29

Table 4. Theory of games 2 x n

Player 2 Min-Max
Strategy
A B C
I 25 33 29 25
Player 1
II 32 27 29 27
Max-Min 32 33 29
No existe un punto mínimo silla montar
Entonces graficamos los puntos

Grafica
35

30

25
Título del eje

20 A
B
15
C
10

0
1 2

Según el punto mas bajo de la grafica la solución esta en la estrategia A y B donde se

interceptan, en esta caso descartamos la C
A B
25 33
32 27
Problem 5. Game Theory method:

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 23 31
Player 1 II 29 25
II 26 29

Table 5. Game Theory m x 2

Player 2
Strategy
A B
I 23 31 23
Player 1 II 29 25 25
II 26 29 26
29 31

No existe un punto mínimo silla montar

Entonces graficamos los puntos

Grafica
I II III

35

30

25
Título del eje

20

15

10

0
1 2

El punto más bajo se encuentra en la estrategia II Y III entonces podemos descartar I

 Player 2
Strategy
A B
II 29 25
III 26 29

Problem 6. Optimum solution of two-person games:

The games represent the latest case of lack of information where intelligent
opponents are working in a conflicting environment. The result is that a very
conservative criterion is generally proposed to solve sets of two people and
sum zero, called minimax - maximin criterion. To determine a fair game, the
minimax = maximin, it is necessary to solve the stable strategy through the
Solver.

Table 6. Mixed strategies

Debemos realiza MinMax y MaxMin

PLAYER 1 MinMax
87 93 35 46 35
PLAYER 2

26 37 45 25 25
65 50 53 32 32
68 48 80 53 48
MaxMin 87 93 80 53

Encontramos que no existe punto de silla

Aplicamos Solver
Podemos decir que el jugador 2 tendrá un porcentaje de ganancia de 9% en 87 y 90%
en 68
Mientras que el jugador 1 tendrá un porcentaje de ganancia de 13% en 93 y 86% en 46
APORTE FRANCY LORENA VARGAS PASTRANA

Phase 4. Decisions under a risk environment, Unit 2.

Problem 1. Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage criteria

(Profit Matrix):
In the company ABC several alternatives are presented to choose the best technology
of four possible, whose performance depends on the adaptation of the workers who will
manipulate the equipments that comprise it. The expected benefits of each alternative
and degree of adaptation of the workers are given in the table, in millions of pesos ($).
For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,6.

En la empresa ABC se presentan varias alternativas para elegir la mejor tecnología de

cuatro posibles, cuyo rendimiento depende de la adaptación de los trabajadores que
manipularán los equipos que lo conforman. Los beneficios esperados de cada
alternativa y el grado de adaptación de los trabajadores se dan en la tabla, en millones
de pesos ($). Para Hurwicz, por favor asuma un alfa de 0,6.

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits
acceptabl successfull very
y y well

Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335

Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410
 1. Pessimistic or Wald or maximin criterion

This criterion does not want to risk and always thinks that once chosen alternative which
is chosen is 5 with 1320 is the worst.

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits very
acceptably successfully well

Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335

Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

2. Optimistic criterion or maximax

The optimistic criterion always thinks that the best alternative will be presented, that is,
will choose themaximum between the maximums. Risk a lot. therefore we chose 1410
very well technology 5
Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits very
acceptabl successfull well
y y
Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335

Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200

Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380

Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275

Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

 3. Criterion of Laplace

The Laplace criterion, since it does not know the probability of occurrence of each
situation, imagines that all have the same probability. Since there are 5 options, the
probability of each is 1 /5 and then the criterion of risk:

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits very
acceptabl successfully well
y
Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335
Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200
Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380
Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275
Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

Technology 1:1/5*1140+1/5*1185+1/5*1230+1/5*1290+1/5*1335 = 1236

Technology 2: 1/5*1350+1/5*1260+1/5*1260+1/5*1245+1/5*1200=1263
Technology 3: 1/5*1200+1/5*1275+1/5*1320+1/5*1350+1/5*1380=1305
Technology 4: 1/5*1365+1/5*1320+1/5*1305+1/5*1290+1/5*1275=1311
Technology 5: 1/5*1335+1/5*1320+1/5*1335+1/5*1365+1/5*1410=1353

Answer: The chosen technology will be 5

 4. Criteria of Savage (opportunity cost)

To apply the criterion, a matrix of opportunity costs must be built, which is what is left to
be gained by not having chosen the best option. Observing the data vertically, that is, by
columns, subtracts the worst result from the best one.

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits very
acceptably successfully well

Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 0 0

Technology 2 0 0 0 1245 1200
Technology 3 0 0 0 0 0
Technology 4 1365 0 0 0 0
Technology 5 0 1320 1335 1365 1410
225 135 105 120 210

Event
Alternative Does not fit Fits Fits Fits well Fits very
acceptabl successfull well
y y
Maximo 1365 1320 1335 1365 1410
Technology 1 225 135 105 75 75
Technology 2 15 60 75 120 210
Technology 3 165 45 15 15 30
Technology 4 0 0 30 75 135
Technology 5 30 0 0 0 0
Answer: From the matrix, the largest opportunity costs are chosen by rows, and of
these the smallest, in summary, of the maximums, the minimum is chosen. Therefore,
following this criterion, the chosen value would be technology
 5. Optimistic Hurwicz criterion - pessimistic

As a result, multiply by 0.40 the best result of each

Alternative (the maximum) and 0.60 for the worst (minimum)

Tecnology 1

1140*0.6 + 1335*0.4 =1218

Tecnology 2

1200*0.6+ 1350*0.4=1260

Tecnology 3

1200*0.6+ 1380*0.4=1272

Tecnology 4

1275*0.6+ 1365*0.4=1311

Tecnology 5

1320*0.6+ 1365*0.4=1338

Answer :the best technology would be 5

Problem 2. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic,
Hurwicz and Savage (Cost matrix):

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its 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 categories: 510, 620, 650, 710 and 730 crates. There are therefore four levels of
supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional
costs, either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table
below shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an
alpha of 0,65.

Un almacén de productos terminados que arrienda sus servicios a las importaciones

desde los EE. UU. Debe planificar su nivel de suministro para satisfacer la demanda de
sus clientes en el día del amor y la amistad. El número exacto de cajas no se conoce,
pero se espera que caiga en una de cinco categorías: 580, 720, 750, 790 y 830 cajas.
Por lo tanto, hay cuatro niveles de suministro. Se espera que la desviación de la
cantidad de tolvas genere costos adicionales, ya sea debido a un suministro excesivo o
porque la demanda no se puede satisfacer. La siguiente tabla muestra los costos en
cientos de dólares (US $). Para Hurwicz, por favor asuma un alfa de 0,55.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1184 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2(720) 1112 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3(750) 1271 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4(790) 1145 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5(830) 1185 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473
 1. Pessimistic or Wald or maximin criterion
This criterion does not want to risk and always thinks that once a strategy has
been chosen, the state of the most unfavorable nature will be presented, for that
reason it will choose the maximum value among the minimums. In our case it
would be alternative e1 with 1571

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5
e1 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473

2. Optimistic criterion or maximax

The optimistic criterion always thinks that the best alternative will be presented,
that is, will choose the maximum among the maximums. Risk a lot. in this case it
would be the alternative e2 with 2645.

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5
e1 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473
 3. Criterion of Laplace

As you do not know the probability of occurrence of each situation, imagine that they all
have the same probability. Since there are five alternatives, the probability of each is 1/5
and then the risk criterion is applied: it is alternative 2 with 2043.2

Alternative e1:1/5*1571+1/5*1620+1/5*2065+1/5*2201+1/5*2561 = 2003.6

Alternative e2: 1/5*1515+1/5*1859+1/5*2005+1/5*2192+1/5*2645=2043.2
Alternative e3: 1/5*1554+1/5*1669+1/5*2115+1/5*2217+1/5*2406=1992.2
Alternative e4: 1/5*1370+1/5*1809+1/5*2062+1/5*2295+1/5*2374=1982
Alternative e5: 1/5*1451+1/5*1867+1/5*2100+1/5*2250+1/5*2473=2028.2

4. Criteria of Savage (opportunity cost)

To apply the criterion, a matrix of opportunity costs must be built, which is what is left to
be gained by not having chosen the best option. Observing the data vertically, that is, by
columns, subtracts the worst result from the best one.

1571 1867 2115 2295 2645

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5
e1 0 -247 -50 -94 -84
e2 -56 -8 -110 -103 0
e3 -17 -198 0 -78 -239
e4 -201 -50 57 103 -271
e5 -120 0 -15 -45 -172

From the matrix, the largest opportunity costs are chosen by rows, and of these the
smallest, in summary, of the maximums, the minimum is chosen. Therefore, following
this criterion, the chosen value would be the alternative e2 since it is -8
 5. Optimistic Hurwicz criterion - pessimistic

As a result, multiply by 0.65 the best result of each alternative (the maximum)
and 0.35 for the worst (minimum).

Alternative e1: 2561*0,65+1571*0,35 = 2214,5

Alternative e2: 2645*0,65+1515*0,35 = 2249,5
Alternative e3: 2406*0,65+1554*0,35= 2107,8
Alternative e4: 2374*0,65+1370*0,35= 2022,6
Alternative e5: 2473*0,65+1451*0,35= 2115,3

According to this criterion, the chosen strategy would be the alternative would be 2 with
2249.5
 Título del gráfico
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 2

Series1 Series2 Series3

 Título del gráfico
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1 2 3 4

Series1 Series2 Series3 Series4

APORTES DE DUFRANY SANCHEZ
Problem 2. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic,
Hurwicz and Savage (Cost matrix):

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the
USA, must plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its 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 categories: 510, 620, 650, 710 and 730
crates. There are therefore four levels of supply. The deviation from the
number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs, either due to
excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an
alpha of 0,65.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1184 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2(720) 1112 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3(750) 1271 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4(790) 1145 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5(830) 1185 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473

event
alternative e1 (580) e2 (720) e3 (750) e4 (790) e5 (830)
e1 (580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2591
e2 (720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3 (750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4 (790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5 (830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473
Problem 3. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic,
Hurwicz and Savage (Cost matrix):
A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the
USA, must plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its 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 categories: 580, 720, 750, 790 and 830
crates. There are therefore four levels of supply. The deviation from the
number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs, either due to
excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an
alpha of 0,55.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1088 1144 982 1019 1032 1069
e2(720) 982 1175 1019 857 1019 1057
e3(750) 1019 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182
e4(790) 957 1019 932 1200 1032 932
e5(830) 1044 1007 1032 894 1188 1200
35

30

25

20

15

10

0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5
Problem 5. Game Theory method:

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 23 31
Player 1 II 29 25
II 26 29
Table 5. Game Theory m x 2

PLAYER 1 X1 + X2 + X3 = 1
X1 = 23 Y1 + 31 Y2
X2 = 29 Y1 + 26 Y2
X3 = 26 Y1 + 29 Y2

PLAYER 2 Y1 + Y2 = 1 Y1 = 1 - Y2
X1 = 23 Y1 + 31 Y2
X2 = 29 Y1 + 26 Y2
X3 = 26 Y1 + 29 Y2

X1 = 23 (1-Y2) + 31Y2
X1 = 23-23Y2+31Y2
X1 = 23+8Y2
X2 = 29 (1-Y2) + 26Y2
X2 = 29-29Y2+26Y2
X2 = 29-3Y2
X3 = 26 (1-Y2) + 29Y2
X3 = 26 - 26Y2 + 29Y2
X3 = 26 + 3Y2

Y2 X1 X2 X3
0 23 29 26
1 31 26 29
2 39 23 32
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5
 Conclusions

 We can deduce that the maximin and minimax strategies lead the two players of the
game to situations in which no player has any reason or incentive to change their
position. Likewise, it is said that a player has a dominant strategy if a particular
strategy is preferred to any other strategy available to him.
 List of references

http://axepymes.pbworks.com/f/solucion_matriz_decision2.pdf

Joyce, J. (1999). The Foundations of Causal Decision Theory. Camdridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=228167&
lang=es&site=eds-live

Prisner, E. (2014). Game Theory. Washington, District of Columbia, USA: Mathematical

Association of America Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=800654&
lang=es&site=eds-live

Owen, G. (2013). Game Theory: Monterey, California, USA: Naval Postgraduate School
Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.asp
x?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=525603&lang=es&site=ehost-live

Abdi, M. (2003). A design strategy for reconfigurable manufacturing systems (RMSs)

using analytical hierarchical process (AHP): a case study: Manchester, UK: International
Journal of Production Research. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=10149095
&lang=es&site=eds-live