Nash Equilibrium-Based Weighting Mechanism for Optimal Turbine Selection in Water Transmission Lines Eliminating Stakeholder Bias through Game Theory
Keywords:
hydroelectric power plant, water transmission lines, Francis turbine, Nash equilibriumAbstract
Selecting the optimal turbine for water conveyance systems is a critical decision in water engineering projects, directly influencing energy efficiency, investment costs, and environmental sustainability. Any bias or error in this decision-making process can have long-term consequences for system performance and overall project efficiency. This study proposes a game-theoretic framework that eliminates human judgment from the weighting process in multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) for turbine selection. By modeling each technical criterion as an independent non-cooperative player and employing Nash Equilibrium, the method produces objective, transparent, and reproducible weights. The proposed approach was tested on a hypothetical dataset of four primary criteria—purchase cost, hydraulic efficiency, service life, and maintenance cost. The algorithm converged to a stable equilibrium within fewer than 500 iterations, without requiring any expert evaluation. The findings demonstrate the framework’s potential to improve transparency, resist collusion, and be adapted to other high-stakes infrastructure projects in water and energy sectors.
Downloads
References
[1] R. Caricimi, G. G. Dranka, D. Setti, and P. Ferreira,“Reframing the selection of hydraulic turbines integrating Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and fuzzy VIKOR multi-criteria methods,” , MDPI, Energies, vol. 15, no. 19, Art. no. 7383, 2022, doi: 10.3390/en15197383.
[2] M. Hamidifar et al.,“A multi-criteria multidimensional model for optimal selection of rural water supply systems,” IWA Publishing, Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology—AQUA, vol. 72, no. 6, pp. 1042–1057, 2023, doi: 10.2166/aqua.2023.028.
[3] Z. Ullah, M. R. Elkadeem, K. M. Kotb, I. B. M. Taha, and S. Wang, “Multi-criteria decision-making model for optimal planning of on/off grid hybrid solar, wind, hydro, biomass clean electricity supply,” Renewable Energy, vol. 179, pp. 885–910, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2021.07.063.
[4] P.-S. Ashofteh, P. Golfam, and H. A. Loáiciga, “Evaluation of river water transfer alternatives with the TODIM multi-criteria decision-making method,” Water Resources Management, vol. 34, no. 15, pp. 4847–4863, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11269-020-02694-2.
[5] M. Abedian, A. Amindoust, R. Maddahi, and J. Jouzdani, “A Nash equilibrium based decision-making method for performance evaluation: a case study,” Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, vol. 13, pp. 5563–5579, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s12652-021-03188-8.
[6] W. Li, S. Jiang, X. Shen, and X. Liu, “Dynamic multi-attribute decision-making method for risk control options in process safety using game theory-based weighting,” MDPI, Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 10, Art. no. 5387, 2024, doi: 10.3390/app14105387.
[7] S. O. Olatinwo and T.-H. Joubert,“A bibliometric analysis and review of resource management in Internet of Water Things: The use of game theory,” MDPI, Water, vol. 14, no. 10, Art. no. 1636, 2022, doi: 10.3390/w14101636.
[8] K. Madani, “Game theory and water resources,” ScienceDirect, Journal of Hydrology, vol. 381, no. 3–4, pp. 225–238, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.11.045.
[9] E. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi and R. Fallahnejad, “Imprecise Shannon’s entropy and multi attribute decision making,” MDPI, Entropy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 53–62, 2010, doi: 10.3390/e12010053.
