Abstract
There are currently three different game strategies originated in economics: (1) Cooperative games (Pareto front), (2) Competitive games (Nash game) and (3) Hierarchical games (Stackelberg game). Each game achieves different equilibria with different performance, and their players play different roles in the games. Here, we introduced game concept into aerodynamic design, and combined it with adjoint method to solve multi-criteria aerodynamic optimization problems. The performance distinction of the equilibria of these three game strategies was investigated by numerical experiments. We computed Pareto front, Nash and Stackelberg equilibria of the same optimization problem with two conflicting and hierarchical targets under different parameterizations by using the deterministic optimization method. The numerical results show clearly that all the equilibria solutions are inferior to the Pareto front. Non-dominated Pareto front solutions are obtained, however the CPU cost to capture a set of solutions makes the Pareto front an expensive tool to the designer.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.