#16332: Game Theory: Build capacity to calculate Shapley value of cooperative
games.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vinceknight | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: PLEASE CHANGE | Resolution:
Keywords: Game Theory, | Merged in:
Cooperative Games | Reviewers:
Authors: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 83a6b0efee2ea0ace43a09758a8156115d414635
u/jcampbell/game_theory__build_capacity_to_calculate_shapley_value_of_cooperative_games_|
Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by vinceknight):
Replying to [comment:4 kcrisman]:
> Hi, nice to see you starting work already!
>
> I would advise you, though, to start your work locally, rather than do a
lot of commits to a branch on Trac, until you have a reasonably well-
formed setup. I say this because I know you will be working on it for a
while this summer, so it isn't in danger of rotting away! In particular,
having good docstrings etc.
That's very helpful, we were wondering what was the best practice and from
the documentation thought that using trac was the way to go. We'll move
away from trac for now :) This ticket should be ready to review pretty
soon.
> I do like that you want to get stuff out early and often. But maybe it
would be good to have something you share with Vince (or others
interested) for now, so that you can hash out what all needs to be in
here, how strings should look, class and module strings, etc. I guess
what I'm saying is that it could be very confusing for a reviewer to try
to review many different starts and stops and reworkings etc. Of course
if this is in close to final form then my apologies.
Absolutely no apologies needed :) We weren't sure what was best practice
:) We'll push to trac when it's ready to review.
> On an unrelated note, I'm wondering whether there happens to be any
faster algorithms for calculating things - there is probably a literature
of computational complexity and game theory, like there is in voting.
Some of these combinatorial things (e.g. for coalitions) get really nasty
really quickly.
To the best of my knowledge there isn't. There are various approximation
algorithms that exist that could be coded in to here in the future
perhaps?
Thanks again for your comments: they're really helpful.
> ----
> New commits:
>
||[http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?id=83a6b0efee2ea0ace43a09758a8156115d414635
83a6b0e]||{{{creates game_thoery folder and computes shapley value}}}||
Cool
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16332#comment:5>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
