On Optimal Allocation of a Continuous Resource Using an Iterative Approach and Total Positivity

Abstract

We study a class of optimal allocation problems, including the well-known Bomber Problem, with the following common probabilistic structure. An aircraft equipped with an amount~x of ammunition is intercepted by enemy airplanes arriving according to a homogenous Poisson process over a fixed time duration~t. Upon encountering an enemy, the aircraft has the choice of spending any amount~0 y x of its ammunition, resulting in the aircraft's survival with probability equal to some known increasing function of y. Two different goals have been considered in the literature concerning the optimal amount~K(x,t) of ammunition spent: (i)~Maximizing the probability of surviving for time~t, which is the so-called Bomber Problem, and (ii) maximizing the number of enemy airplanes shot down during time~t, which we call the Fighter Problem. Several authors have attempted to settle the following conjectures about the monotonicity of K(x,t): [A] K(x,t) is decreasing in t, [B] K(x,t) is increasing in x, and [C] the amount~x-K(x,t) held back is increasing in x. [A] and [C] have been shown for the Bomber Problem with discrete ammunition, while [B] is still an open question. In this paper we consider both time and ammunition continuous, and for the Bomber Problem prove [A] and [C], while for the Fighter we prove [A] and [C] for one special case and [B] and [C] for another. These proofs involve showing that the optimal survival probability and optimal number shot down are totally positive of order 2 (TP2) in the Bomber and Fighter Problems, respectively. The TP2 property is shown by constructing convergent sequences of approximating functions through an iterative operation which preserves TP2 and other properties.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…