Modeling Credible Retaliation Threats in Deterring the Smuggling of Nuclear Weapons Using Partial Inspection—A Three-Stage Game

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2013.0288

References

  • Allison GT (2005) Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe (Time Books, Henry Holt and Company, New York).Google Scholar
  • Axelrod RM (1997) The Complexity of Cooperation: Agent-Based Models of Competition and Collaboration (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Azad S (2011) Defence against terrorist attacks: Game theory can help. Accessed January 12, 2014, http://www.idsa.in/node/6468/2099.Google Scholar
  • Bakır NO (2008) A decision tree model for evaluating countermeasures to secure cargo at United States southwestern ports of entry. Decision Anal. 5(4):230–248.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Barrett AM (2010) Cost effectiveness of on-site chlorine generation for chlorine truck attack prevention. Decision Anal. 7(4):366–377.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bier VM, Haphuriwat N (2011) Analytical method to identify the number of containers to inspect at US ports to deter terrorist attacks. Ann. Oper. Res. 187(1):137–158.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bier VM, Haphuriwat N, Menoyo J, Zimmerman R, Culpen AM (2008) Optimal resource allocation for defense of targets based on differing measures of attractiveness. Risk Anal. 28(3):763–770.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Brown G, Carlyle M, Salmerón J, Wood K (2006) Defending critical infrastructure. Interfaces 36(6):530–544.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Camerer CF (2003) Behavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Cavusoglu H, Raghunathan S (2004) Configuration of detection software: A comparison of decision and game theory approaches. Decision Anal. 1(3):131–148.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • CNN (2001) Bush announces opening of attacks. Accessed January 14, 2014, http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/10/07/ret.attack.bush/.Google Scholar
  • Cox LA (2009) Game theory and risk analysis. Risk Anal. 29(8):1062–1068.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dixit AK, Nalebuff BJ (1991) Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
  • Goldstein A (2000) Deterrence and Security in the 21st Century: China, Britain, France, and the Enduring Legacy of the Nuclear Revolution (Stanford University Press, Redwood City, CA).Google Scholar
  • Hall JR (2009) The elephant in the room is called game theory. Risk Anal. 29(8):1061.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Haller NM, ed. (2013) U.S. Air Force Strategic Deterrence Capabilities in the 21st Century Security Environment: A Workshop Summary (National Academies Press, Washington, DC).Google Scholar
  • Hao M, Jin S, Zhuang J (2009) Robustness of optimal defensive resource allocations in the face of less fully rational attacker. Proc. 2009 Indust. Engrg. Res. Conf., Miami, FL, 886–891.Google Scholar
  • Haphuriwat N, Bier VM, Willis HH (2011) Deterring the smuggling of nuclear weapons in container freight through detection and retaliation. Decision Anal. 8(2):88–102.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hausken K, Zhuang J (2011a) Governments' and terrorists' defense and attack in a T-period game. Decision Anal. 8(1):46–70.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Hausken K, Zhuang J (2011b) The timing and deterrence of terrorist attacks due to exogenous dynamics. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 63(6):726–735.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Helene C (2011) Obama announces killing of Osama Bin Laden. New York Times (May 1), http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/bin-laden-dead-u-s-official-says/?_r=1.Google Scholar
  • Jose VRR, Zhuang J (2013) Technology adoption, accumulation, and competition in multi-period attacker-defender games. Military Oper. Res. 18(2):33–47.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Keeney GL, von Winterfeldt D (2011) A value model for evaluating homeland security decisions. Risk Anal. 31(9):1470–1487.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Keeney RL (2007) Modeling values for anti-terrorism analysis. Risk Anal. 27(3):585–596.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Knopf JW (2010) The fourth wave in deterrence research. Contemporary Security Policy 31(1):1–33.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Kreps DM (1990) Game Theory and Economic Modelling (Oxford University Press, New York).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Levi MA (2004) Deterring nuclear terrorism. Issues Sci. Tech. 20(3):70–74.Google Scholar
  • Marshall E (2012) Parsing terrorism. Science 336(6083):820–823.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mas-Colell A, Whinston MD, Green JR (1995) Microeconomic Theory (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
  • McLay L, Rothschild C, Guikema S (2012) Robust adversarial risk analysis: A level-k approach. Decision Anal. 9(1):41–54.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Merrick JRW, McLay LA (2010) Is screening cargo containers for smuggled nuclear threats worthwhile? Decision Anal. 7(2):155–171.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Miller G (2011) CIA spied on Bin Laden from safe house. Washington Post (May 5), http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/cia-spied-on-bin-laden-from-safe-house/2011/05/05/AFXbG31F_story.html.Google Scholar
  • Morton DP, Pan F, Saeger KJ (2007) Models for nuclear smuggling interdiction. IIE Trans. 39(1):3–14.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (2004) The 9/11 Commission report: Final report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
  • Nikoofal ME, Zhuang J (2012) Robust allocation of a defensive budget considering an attacker's private information. Risk Anal. 32(5):930–943.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Poundstone W (1992) Prisoner's Dilemma (Bantam Doubleday Dell, New York).Google Scholar
  • Powell R (2007) Defending against terrorist attacks with limited resources. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 101(3):527–541.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sandler T, Arce DG (2003) Terrorism and game theory. Simulation Gaming 34(3):319–337.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Schelling TC (1984) Choice and Consequence (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
  • Schelling TC (2008) Arms and Influence (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
  • Sevillano JC, Rios Insua D, Rios J (2012) Adversarial risk analysis: The Somali pirates case. Decision Anal. 9(2):86–95.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Shan X, Zhuang J (2013a) Cost of equity in homeland security resource allocations in the face of a strategic attacker. Risk Anal. 33(6):1083–1099.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shan X, Zhuang J (2013b) Hybrid defensive resource allocations in the face of a partially strategic attacker. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 228(1):262–272.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Shan X, Zhuang J (2013c) Subsidizing to disrupt a terrorism supply chain—A four-player game. J. Oper. Res. Soc., ePub ahead of print May 22, http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jors/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/jors201353a.html.Google Scholar
  • Trager RF, Zagorcheva DP (2006) Deterring terrorism: It can be done. Internat. Security 30(3):87–123.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Train K (2003) Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wang C, Bier VM (2011) Target-hardening decisions based on uncertain multiattribute terrorist utility. Decision Anal. 8(4):286–302.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Wang X, Zhuang J (2011) Balancing congestion and security in the presence of strategic applicants with private information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 212(1):100–111.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Yang R, Kiekintveld C, Ordóñez F, Tambe M, John R (2013) Improving resource allocation strategies against human adversaries in security games: An extended study. Artificial Intelligence 195:440–469.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zhuang J, Bier VM (2007) Balancing terrorism and natural disasters—Defensive strategy with endogenous attacker effort. Oper. Res. 55(5):976–991.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Zhuang J, Bier VM, Alagoz O (2010) Modeling secrecy and deception in a multiple-period attacker-defender signaling game. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 203(2):409–418.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.