Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We only had one lecture about the subject and already have quite difficult questions, could someone please help me?

The matrix looks something like this:

\begin{matrix} 3 & 2 & 1 & 4 & 5 \\ 2 & 5 & 1 & 3 & 4 \\ 4 & 5 & 1 & 2 & 3 \\ 3 & 4 & 0 & 5 & 0 \\ 1 & 3 & 0 & 5 & 0 \end{matrix}

Is it true that row will always choose row 1,2 or 3 and column would choose 2 or 4 for the best pay-off? Or how can I determine a saddle point?

share|cite|improve this question
    
I'm not sure whether these are meant to be the payoffs for row or for column, but in either case neither row $4$ nor row $5$ is dominated by any of rows $1$ through $3$. Could you explain why you think that row would always choose one of rows $1$ through $3$? – joriki Nov 5 '12 at 18:46
    
Because the minimum payoff for row would be 1, independent of columns choice, en in rows 4 and 5 the minimum payoff is 0, so i'd suppose row would choose 1,2 or 3 – user48301 Nov 5 '12 at 21:42
    
Now I'm wondering whether you know which player's payoffs these are. You're arguing as if they're payoffs for the row player -- but then it would be column $3$ that dominates columns $2$ and $4$ and not the other way around? – joriki Nov 5 '12 at 22:47
up vote 0 down vote accepted

The answer is partially yes. The saddles points are (1,3),(2,3) and (3,3) where the numbers indicate the rows and columns respectively. I assumed the row player is the maximizer and the column player is the minimizer.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.