Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
A. Bensoussan, H. SchuppenvanJ. (1985)
Optimal control of partially observable stochastic systems with an exponential-of-integral performance indexTheoretical Computer Science
A. Lim, X. Zhou (2005)
A new risk?sensitive maximum principle, 50
E. Tyrone Duncan (2013)
Linear?exponential?quadratic Gaussian control, 58
Wenjie Ye, Zhiyong Yu (2020)
Exact controllability of linear mean‐field stochastic systems and observability inequality for mean‐field backward stochastic differential equationsAsian Journal of Control, 24
J. Lasry, P. Lions (2006)
Jeux à champ moyen. I – Le cas stationnaireComptes Rendus Mathematique, 343
H. Tembine, Q. Zhu, T. Başar (2014)
Risk?sensitive mean field games, 59
W. Fleming (2006)
Risk?sensitive stochastic control and differential games, 6
B. Djehiche, H. Tembine, R. Tempone (2015)
A stochastic maximum principle for risk?sensitive mean?field type control, 60
Ruimin Xu, Jingtao Shi (2019)
ϵ-Nash mean-field games for linear-quadratic systems with random jumps and applicationsInternational Journal of Control, 94
J. Huang, S. Wang, Z. Wu (2016)
Backward mean?field linear?quadratic?Gaussian (LQG) games: full and partial information, 61
Mark Davis, Sébastien Lleo (2010)
Jump-Diffusion Risk-Sensitive Asset Management I: Diffusion Factor ModelSIAM J. Financial Math., 2
H. Nagai (2003)
Optimal strategies for risk?sensitive portfolio optimization problems for general factor models, 41
T. Bielecki, S. Pliska (1999)
Risk-Sensitive Dynamic Asset ManagementApplied Mathematics and Optimization, 39
Ruimin Xu, Feng Zhang (2020)
ϵ-Nash mean-field games for general linear-quadratic systems with applicationsAutom., 114
Haibo Gu, Kexin Liu, Guoliang Zhu, Jinhu Lü (2022)
Leader‐following consensus of stochastic dynamical multi‐agent systems with fixed and switching topologies under proportional‐integral protocolsAsian Journal of Control, 25
M. Nourian, P. Caines (2012)
Epsilon-Nash Mean Field Game Theory for Nonlinear Stochastic Dynamical Systems with Major and Minor AgentsSIAM J. Control. Optim., 51
Y. Hu, J. Huang, T. Nie (2018)
Linear?quadratic?Gaussian mixed mean?field games with heterogeneous input constraints, 56
J. Moon, T. Başar (2017)
Linear quadratic risk?sensitive and robust mean field games, 62
Jun Moon, T. Başar (2018)
Risk-Sensitive Mean Field Games via the Stochastic Maximum PrincipleDynamic Games and Applications
Zhipeng Li, D. Marelli, M. Fu, Zhigang Ren (2021)
Decentralized social‐optimal solution of finite number of average field linear quadratic controlAsian Journal of Control, 24
Jingtao Shi, Zhen Wu (2012)
Maximum Principle for Risk-Sensitive Stochastic Optimal Control Problem and Applications to FinanceStochastic Analysis and Applications, 30
Minyi Huang (2009)
Large-Population LQG Games Involving a Major Player: The Nash Certainty Equivalence PrincipleSIAM J. Control. Optim., 48
M. Huang, P. E. Caines, E. P. Malhamé (2007)
Large?population cost?coupled LQG problems with nonuniform agents: individual?mass behavior and decentralized, 52
J. Lasry, P. Lions (2007)
Mean field gamesJapanese Journal of Mathematics, 2
H. Hata, Yasunari Iida (2006)
A risk-sensitive stochastic control approach to an optimal investment problem with partial informationFinance and Stochastics, 10
H. Hata, J. Sekine (2010)
Explicit Solution to a Certain Non-ELQG Risk-sensitive Stochastic Control ProblemApplied Mathematics & Optimization, 62
J. Lasry, P. Lions (2006)
Jeux à champ moyen. II – Horizon fini et contrôle optimalComptes Rendus Mathematique, 343
This paper studies large‐population dynamic games involving a linear‐quadratic‐Gaussian (LQG) system with an exponential cost functional. The parameter in the cost functional can describe an investor's risk attitude. In the game, there are a major agent and a population of N$$ N $$ minor agents where N$$ N $$ is very large. The agents in the games are coupled via both their individual stochastic dynamics and their individual cost functions. The mean field methodology yields a set of decentralized controls, which are shown to be an ϵ$$ \epsilon $$‐Nash equilibrium for a finite N$$ N $$ population system where ϵ=O1N$$ \epsilon =O\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}\right) $$. Numerical results are established to illustrate the impact of the population's collective behaviors and the consistency of the mean field estimation.
Asian Journal of Control – Wiley
Published: Nov 1, 2023
Keywords: decentralized control; large‐population system; major agent; minor agent; Nash equilibrium; risk‐sensitive
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.