Markov Ug Exam Examples

7/30/2019 Markov Ug Exam Examples

1/18

OR-Notes

J E Beasley

OR-Notes are a series of introductory notes on topics that fall under the broad heading of the

field of operations research (OR). They were originally used by me in an introductory OR

course I give at Imperial College. They are now available for use by any students and

teachers interested in OR subject to the followingconditions.

A full list of the topics available in OR-Notes can be foundhere.

Markov processes examples

Here we give some more Markov processes examples.

Markov processes example 1997 UG exam

In analysing switching by Business Class customers between airlines the following data has

been obtained by British Airways (BA):

Next flight by

BA Competition

Last flight by BA 0.85 0.15

Competition 0.10 0.90

For example if the last flight by a Business Class customer was by BA the probability that

their next flight is by BA is 0.85. Business Class customers make 2 flights a year on average.

Currently BA have 30% of the Business Class market. What would you forecast BA's share

of the Business Class market to be after two years?

Solution

We have the initial system state s1 given by s1 = [0.30, 0.70] and the transition matrix P is

given by

P = | 0.85 0.15 |2 = | 0.7375 0.2625 |

| 0.10 0.90 | | 0.1750 0.8250 |

where the square term arises as Business Class customers make 2 flights a year on average.

Hence after one year has elapsed the state of the system s2 = s1P = [0.34375, 0.65625]

After two years have elapsed the state of the system = s3 = s2P = [0.368, 0.632]

and note here that the elements of s2 and s3 add to one (as required).
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/jeb.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/rights.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/rights.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/contents.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/contents.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/contents.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/markov.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/rights.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/contents.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/markov.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/jeb.html


2/18

So after two years have elapsed BA's share of the Business Class market is 36.8%


An admissions tutor is analysing applications from potential students for a particularundergraduate course at Imperial College (IC). She regards each potential student as being in

one of four possible states:

State 1: has not applied to IC

State 2: has applied to IC but an accept/reject decision has not yet been made

State 3: has applied to IC and has been rejected

State 4: has applied to IC and has been accepted (been made an offer of a place)

At the start of the year (month 1 in the admissions year) all potential students are in state 1.

Her review of admissions statistics for recent years has identified the following transition

matrix for the probability of moving between states each month:

To 1 2 3 4

From 1 | 0.97 0.03 0 0 |

2 | 0 0.10 0.15 0.75 |

3 | 0 0 1 0 |

4 | 0 0 0 1 |

What percentage of potential students will have been accepted after 3 months have

elapsed?

Is it possible to work out a meaningful long-run system state or not (and why)?

The admissions tutor has control over the elements in one row of the above transition matrix,

namely row 2.

The elements in this row reflect:

transition from 2 to 2: the speed with which applications are processed each month

transition from 2 to 3: the proportion of applicants who are rejected each month

transition from 2 to 4: the proportion of applicants who are accepted each month.

To be more specific, at the start of each month the admissions tutor has to decide the

proportion of applicants who should be accepted that month. However she is constrained by a

policy decision that, at the end of each month, the total number of rejections should never bemore than one-third of the total number of offers, nor should it ever be less than 20% of the

total number of offers.

Further analysis reveals that applicants who wait longer than 2 months between applying to

IC and receiving a decision (reject or accept) almost never choose to come to IC, even if they

get an offer of a place.

Formulate the problem that the admissions tutor faces each month as a linear program.

Comment on any assumptions you have made in so doing.

Solution
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.html


3/18

We have the initial system state s1 given by s1 = [1, 0, 0, 0] and the transition matrix P given

by

P = | 0.97 0.03 0 0 |

| 0 0.10 0.15 0.75 |

| 0 0 1 0 |

| 0 0 0 1 |

Hence after one month has elapsed the state of the system s 2 = s1P = [0.97, 0.03, 0, 0]

After two months have elapsed the state of the system = s 3 = s2P = [0.9409, 0.0321, 0.0045,

0.0225]

After three months have elapsed the state of the system = s4 = s3P = [0.912673, 0.031437,

0.009315, 0.046575]

and note here that the elements of s2, s3 and s4 add to one (as required).

Hence 4.6575% of potential students will have been accepted after 3 months have elapsed.

It is not possible to work out a meaningful long-run system state as the admissions year is

only (at most) 12 months long. In reality the admissions year is probably shorter than 12

months.

With regard to the linear program we must distinguish within state 2 (those who have applied

to IC but an accept/reject decision has not yet been made) how long an applicant has been

waiting.

Hence expand state 2 to states:

2a - a new application received

2b - a new application received one month ago

In this way we never leave a new application waiting longer than 2 months - applicants in

this category almost never come to IC anyway.

Hence we have the new transition matrix

1 2a 2b 3 4

P = 1 | 0.97 0.03 0 0 0 |2a | 0 0 1-X-Y X Y |

2b | 0 0 0 1-y y |

3 | 0 0 0 1 0 |

4 | 0 0 0 0 1 |

Here X is the reject probability each month for a newly received application and Y is be the

acceptance probability each month for a newly received application (these are decision

variables for the admissions tutor), where X>=0 and Y>=0.

In a similar fashion y is the acceptance probability each month for an application that was

received one month ago (again a decision variable for the admissions tutor).


4/18

Each month then, at the start of the month, we have a known proportion in each of the states

1, 2a, 2b, 3 and 4.

Hence the equation for the (unknown) proportions [z1,z2a,z2b,z3,z4] at the end of each month is

given by:

[z 1,z2a,z2b,z3,z4] = [known proportions at start of month]P

where P is the transition matrix given above involving the variables X,Y and y. If we were to

write this matrix equation out in full we would have 5 linear equalities. In addition we must

have that:

z 1+z2a+z2b+z3+z4 = 1

z 1,z2a,z2b,z3,z4 >= 0

and the policy conditions are:

z 3 = 0.2z4

Hence we have a set of linear constraints in the variables [X,Y,y,z 1,z2a,z2b,z3,z4]

An appropriate objective function might be to maximise the sum of the acceptance

probabilities (Y+y) but other objectives could be suggested for this system.

Hence we have an LP that can be solved to decide X,Y and y each month.

Comments are:

row 1 of the transition matrix constant throughout the year

does not take into account any information we might have on how applicants respond

to the offers made to them


A petrol station owner is considering the effect on his business (Superpet) of a new petrol

station (Global) which has opened just down the road. Currently (of the total market sharedbetween Superpet and Global) Superpet has 80% of the market and Global has 20%.

Analysis over the last week has indicated the following probabilities for customers switching

the station they stop at each week:

To

Superpet Global

From Superpet 0.75 0.25

Global 0.55 0.45

What will be the expected market share for Superpet and Global after another two

weeks have past?


5/18

What would be the long-run prediction for the expected market share for Superpet and

Global?

Solution

Letting

state 1 = Superpet

state 2 = Global

we have the initial system state s1 given by s1 = [0.80, 0.20] and the transition matrix P given

by

P = |0.75 0.25 |

|0.55 0.45 |

Hence after one week has elapsed the state of the system s2 = s1P = [0.71, 0.29] and so aftertwo weeks have elapsed the state of the system = s 3 = s2P = [0.692, 0.308] and note here that

the elements of s2 and s3 add to one (as required).

Hence the market shares after two weeks have elapsed are 69.2% and 30.8% for Superpet and

Global respectively.

Assuming that in the long-run the system reaches an equilibrium [x1, x2] where

[x1, x2] = [x1, x2]P and x1 + x2 = 1

we have that

x1 = 0.75x1 + 0.55x2 (1)

x2 = 0.25x1 + 0.45x2 (2)

and x1 + x2 = 1 (3)

From (3) we have that x2 = 1-x1

so substituting into (1) we get

x1 = 0.75x1 + 0.55(1-x1)

i.e. (1-0.75+0.55)x1 = 0.55

i.e. x1 = 0.55/0.80 = 0.6875

Hence x2 = 1-x1 = 1-0.6875 = 0.3125

Note that as a check we have that these values for x1 and x2 satisfy equations (1) - (3) (to

within rounding errors).

Hence the long-run market shares are 68.75% and 31.25% for Superpet and Global

respectively.


6/18


A company is considering using Markov theory to analyse brand switching between three

different brands of floppy disks. Survey data has been gathered and has been used to estimate

the following transition matrix for the probability of moving between brands each month:

To Brand

1 2 3

From Brand 1 | 0.80 0.10 0.10

2 | 0.03 0.95 0.02

3 | 0.20 0.05 0.75

The current (month 1) market shares are 45%, 25% and 30% for brands 1, 2 and 3

respectively.

What will be the expected market shares after two months have elapsed (i.e. in month

3)?

What is the long-run prediction for the expected market share for each of the three

brands?

Would you expect the actual market share to approach the long-run prediction for the

market or not (and why)?

Solution

We have the initial system state s1 given by s1 = [0.45, 0.25, 0.30] and the transition matrix P

given by

P = |0.80 0.10 0.10 |

|0.03 0.95 0.02 |

|0.20 0.05 0.75 |

Hence after one month has elapsed the state of the system s 2 = s1P = [0.4275, 0.2975, 0.2750]

and so after two months have elapsed the state of the system = s 3 = s2P = [0.4059, 0.3391,

0.2550] and note here that the elements of s2 and s3 add to one (as required).

Hence the market shares after two months have elapsed are 40.59%, 33.91% and 25.50% for

brands 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

Assuming that in the long-run the system reaches an equilibrium [x1, x2, x3] where

[x1, x2, x3] = [x1, x2, x3]P and x1 + x2 + x3 = 1

we have that

x1 = 0.80x1 + 0.03x2 + 0.20x3

x2 = 0.10x1 + 0.95x2 + 0.05x3

x3 = 0.10x1 + 0.02x2 + 0.75x3


7/18

x1 + x2 + x3 = 1

Rearranging we get

0.20x1 = 0.03x2 + 0.20x3 (1)

0.05x2 = 0.10x1 + 0.05x3 (2)0.25x3 = 0.10x1 + 0.02x2 (3)

x1 + x2 + x3 = 1 (4)

Now subtracting equation (3) from equation (2) we get

0.05x2 - 0.25x3 = 0.05x3 - 0.02x2

i.e. 0.07x2 = 0.30x3

i.e. x2 = (0.30/0.07)x3 (5)

Now from equation (4) we have

x1 = 1 - x2 - x3

so substituting in equation (1) we get

0.20(1 - x2 - x3) = 0.03x2 + 0.20x3

i.e. 0.20 = 0.23x2 + 0.40x3

Substituting from equation (5) for x2 we get

0.20 = 0.23(0.30/0.07)x3 + 0.40x3

i.e. x3 = 0.1443

Hence from equation (5)

x2 = (0.30/0.07)x3 = 0.6184

and x1 = 1 - x2 - x3 = 1 - 0.6184 - 0.1443 = 0.2373

Note that as a check we have that these values for x1, x2 and x3 satisfy equations (1) - (4) (to

within rounding errors).

Hence the long-run market shares are 23.73%, 61.84% and 14.43% for brands 1, 2 and 3

respectively.

Have that after two months s3 (calculated above) not close to the long-run market shares and

would expect changing circumstances to render the transition matrix invalid.



8/18

In analysing switching between different brands of copper pipe survey data has been used to

estimate the following transition matrix for the probability of moving between brands each

month:

To Brand

1 2 3 4From Brand 1 | 0.95 0.02 0.02 0.01

2 | 0.05 0.90 0.02 0.03

3 | 0.10 0.05 0.83 0.02

4 | 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.72

The current (month 1) market shares are 45%, 23%, 20% and 12% for brands 1, 2, 3 and 4

respectively.

What will be the expected market shares after two months have elapsed (i.e. in month

3)?

What is the long-run prediction for the expected market share for each of the four

brands?

Would you expect the actual market share to approach the long-run prediction for the

market or not (and why)?

The management of brand 1 are concerned that they should be aiming for a long- run

market share of 75% by manipulating the transition probabilities from brand 1 to

brands 2, 3 and 4 (as well as the transition probability from brand 1 to brand 1).

Formulate the problem of deciding appropriate transition probabilities as alinear

program.

Solution

We have the initial system state s1 given by s1 = [0.45, 0.23, 0.20, 0.12] and the transition

matrix P given by

P = | 0.95 0.02 0.02 0.01 |

| 0.05 0.90 0.02 0.03 |

| 0.10 0.05 0.83 0.02 |

| 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.72 |

Hence after one month has elapsed the state of the system s 2 = s1P = [0.4746, 0.2416, 0.1820,

0.1018] and so after two months have elapsed the state of the system = s 3 = s2P = [0.494384,0.249266, 0.16742, 0.08893] and note here that the elements of s2 and s3 add to one (as

required).

Hence the market shares after two months have elapsed are 49.44%, 24.93%, 16.74% and

8.89% for brands 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively.

Assuming that in the long-run the system reaches an equilibrium [x1, x2, x3, x4] where

[x1, x2, x3, x4] = [x1, x2, x3, x4]P and x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1

we have that
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.html


9/18

x1 = 0.95x1 + 0.05x2 + 0.10x3 + 0.13x4

x2 = 0.02x1 + 0.90x2 + 0.05x3 + 0.13x4

x3 = 0.02x1 + 0.02x2 + 0.83x3 + 0.02x4

x4 = 0.01x1 + 0.03x2 + 0.02x3 + 0.72x4

x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1

Rearranging we get

0.05x1 = 0.05x2 + 0.10x3 + 0.13x4 (1)

0.10x2 = 0.02x1 + 0.05x3 + 0.13x4 (2)

0.17x3 = 0.02x1 + 0.02x2 + 0.02x4 (3)

0.28x4 = 0.01x1 + 0.03x2 + 0.02x3 (4)

x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1 (5)

Now from equation (3) we have

0.17x3 = 0.02(x1 + x2 + x4)

and from equation (5) we have

x1 + x2 + x4 = 1 - x3

Hence

0.17x3 = 0.02(1-x3)

i.e. 0.19x3 = 0.02

i.e. x3 = (0.2/0.19) = 0.10526

Now subtracting equation (2) from equation (1) we get

0.05x1 - 0.10x2 = 0.05x2 + 0.10x3 - 0.02x1 - 0.05x3

i.e. 0.07x1 - 0.15x2 = 0.05x3 (6)

Also substituting for x4 from equation (5) in equation (4) we have

0.28(1 - x1 - x2 - x3) = 0.01x1 + 0.03x2 + 0.02x3

i.e. 0.28 = 0.29x1 + 0.31x2 + 0.30x3

i.e. 0.29x1 + 0.31x2 = 0.28 - 0.30x3 (7)

Multiplying equation (6) by 0.31 and equation (7) by 0.15 and adding we get

(0.31)(0.07)x1 + (0.15)(0.29)x1 = (0.31)(0.05)x3 + (0.15)(0.28) - (0.15)(0.30)x3


10/18

and since we know x3 = 0.10526 we have x1 = 0.59655

Hence from equation (6) we find that x2 = 0.24330 and from equation (5) that x4 = 0.05489

Note that as a check we have that these values for x1, x2, x3 and x4 satisfy equations (1) - (5)

(to within rounding errors).

Hence the long-run market shares are 59.66%, 24.33%, 10.53% and 5.49% for brands 1, 2, 3

and 4 respectively.

Have that after two months s3 (calculated above) not close to the long-run market shares and

would expect changing circumstances to render the transition matrix invalid.

We need a long-run system state of [0.75, x2, x3, x4] where x2, x3 and x4 are unknown (but

sum to 0.25) and we have a transition matrix given by

P =

| p1 p2 p3 p4 |

| 0.05 0.90 0.02 0.03 |

| 0.10 0.05 0.83 0.02 |

| 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.72 |

where p1, p2, p3 and p4 are unknown (but sum to one).

Hence using the equation

[0.75, x2, x3, x4] = [0.75, x2, x3, x4]P

we have the equations

0.75 = 0.75p1 + 0.05x2 + 0.10x3 + 0.13x4

x2 = 0.75p2 + 0.90x2 + 0.05x3 + 0.13x4

x3 = 0.75p3 + 0.02x2 + 0.83x3 + 0.02x4

x4 = 0.75p4 + 0.03x2 + 0.02x3 + 0.72x4

together with

x2 + x3 + x4 = 0.25

p1 + p2 + p3 + p4 = 1

Here we have six equations in seven unknowns and so to solve we need an appropriate

objective. In order to avoid having to change the transition probabilities too much a suitable

objective would be

maximise p1


11/18

i.e. find the largest value for the transition probability from brand 1 to itself such that we

achieve the long-run market share of 75%.

Hence the LP is

maximise p1

subject to

0.75 = 0.75p1 + 0.05x2 + 0.10x3 + 0.13x4

x2 = 0.75p2 + 0.90x2 + 0.05x3 + 0.13x4

x3 = 0.75p3 + 0.02x2 + 0.83x3 + 0.02x4

x4 = 0.75p4 + 0.03x2 + 0.02x3 + 0.72x4

x2 + x3 + x4 = 0.25

p1 + p2 + p3 + p4 = 1

x2, x3, x4 >= 0

p1, p2, p3, p4 >= 0


An operational researcher is analysing switching between two different products. She knows

that in period 1 the market shares for the two products were 55% and 45% but that in period 2

the corresponding market shares were 67% and 33% and in period 3 70% and 30%. The

researcher believes that an accurate representation of the market share in any period can be

obtained using Markov processes. Assuming her belief is correct:

Estimate the transition matrix.

Calculate the market shares in period 4 using the estimated transition matrix.

If the actual market shares for period 4 were 71% and 29% would you revise yourestimate of the transition matrix or not? Give reasons for your decision.

Solution

We have that s1, the state of the system in period 1, is given by s1=[0.55, 0.45] with s2=[0.67,

0.33] and s3=[0.70, 0.30]

Assuming the researcher is correct then s1 and s2 are linked by s2 = s1(P) where P is the

transition matrix. We also have that s3 and s2 are linked by s3 = s2(P).

Now we have that P will be a 2 by 2 matrix, and that the elements of each row of P add toone, so that we can write


12/18

P = |x1 1-x1|

|x2 1-x2|

where x1 and x2 are unknown.

Using s2 = s1(P) we have

[0.67, 0.33] = [0.55, 0.45] |x1 1- x1|

|x2 1- x2|

and using s3 = s2(P) we have

[0.70, 0.30] = [0.67, 0.33] |x1 1- x1|

|x2 1- x2|

Hence, expanding, we have

0.67 = 0.55x1 + 0.45x2 (1)0.33 = 0.55(1 - x1) + 0.45(1 - x2) (2)

0.70 = 0.67x1 + 0.33x2 (3)

0.30 = 0.67(1 - x1) + 0.33(1 - x2) (4)

Equation (2), when rearranged, becomes equation (1) and similarly equation (4), when

rearranged, becomes equation (3). Hence we have two simultaneous equations (equations (1)

and (3)) in two unknowns.

From equation (1)

x1 = (0.67 - 0.45x2)/0.55

so substituting for x1 in equation (3) we get

0.70 = 0.67[(0.67 - 0.45x2)/0.55] + 0.33x2

i.e. (0.70)(0.55) = (0.67)(0.67) - (0.67)(0.45)x2 + (0.33)(0.55)x2

i.e. x2 = [(0.67)(0.67)-(0.70)(0.55)]/[(0.67)(0.45)-(0.33)(0.55)]

i.e. x2 = 0.5325 and

x1 = (0.67 - 0.45x2)/0.55 = 0.7825

Hence our estimate of the transition matrix P

= |x1 1-x1|

|x2 1-x2|

= |0.7825 0.2175|

|0.5325 0.4675|

Note as a check we can verify that, with this estimated transition matrix, we have s2 = s1(P)

and s3 = s2(P).


13/18

The market shares for period 4 are given by

s4 = s3(P)

= [0.70, 0.30] |0.7825 0.2175|

|0.5325 0.4675|

i.e. s4 = [0.7075, 0.2925]

and note here that the elements of s4 add to one (as required).

Hence the estimated market shares for period 4 are 70.75% and 29.25%.

If the actual market shares are 71% and 29% then this compares well with the shares

estimated above and so there would seem no reason to revise the estimate of the transition

matrix.


An admissions tutor is analysing (with help from the Management School!) applications from

potential students for undergraduate courses at Imperial College (IC). A potential student can

(for the purpose of preliminary analysis) be regarded as being in one of five possible states:

State 1: has not applied to IC

State 2: has applied to IC

State 3: has applied to IC and has been interviewed

State 4: has applied to IC and has been rejected

State 5: has applied to IC and has been made an offer of a place

At the start of the year (month 1 in the admissions year) all potential students are in state 1.

A review of admissions statistics has identified the following transition matrix for the

probability of moving between states each month:

To 1 2 3 4 5From 1 | 0.95 0.05 0 0 0 |

2 | 0 0.2 0.7 0 0.1 |

3 | 0 0 0.3 0.6 0.1 |

4 | 0 0 0 1 0 |

5 | 0 0 0 0 1 |

What percentage of potential students will have been offered places after 3 months

have elapsed?

Is it possible to work out a long-run system state or not (and why)?

Formulate the problem of deciding the percentage of potential students who have been

offered places in each month up to (and including) the 10th month of the admissions

year as a linear program
http://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.htmlhttp://people.brunel.ac.uk/~mastjjb/jeb/or/lp.html


14/18

Discuss the importance of the objective function of the linear program derived above.

Discuss what enhancements/changes could be made to the above preliminary analysis

in order to enable the admissions tutor to better analyse the admission of students.

Solution

We have the states as defined in the question with

s1=[1,0,0,0,0]

and P = | 0.95 0.05 0 0 0 |

| 0 0.2 0.7 0 0.1 |

| 0 0 0.3 0.6 0.1 |

| 0 0 0 1 0 |

| 0 0 0 0 1 |

Hence

s2 = s1P = [0.95, 0.05, 0, 0, 0]

s3 = s2P = [0.9025, 0.0575, 0.035, 0, 0.005]

s4 = s3P = [0.857375, 0.056625, 0.05075, 0.021, 0.01425]

Therefore 1.425% of potential students are offered a place after 3 months.

No long-run system state as absorbing states (4 and 5) are present (or because the admissions

year restarts after period 12).

Let sit = the proportion in state i at the end of period t then the matrix equation s t = st-1(P)

t=2,...,12

becomes the linear equations

s1t = 0.95s1t-1 t=2,.. .,12

s2t = 0.05s1t-1 + 0.2s2t-1 t=2,...,12

s3t = 0.7s2t-1 + 0.3s3t-1 t=2,...,12

s4t = 0.6s3t-1 + 1s4t-1 t=2,...,12

s5t = 0.1s2t-1 + 0.1s3t-1 + 1s5t-1 t=2,...,12

with initial conditions

s11 = 1 s21 = s31 = s41 = s51 = 0

It does notmatter about the objective function - any linear function of the variables will do,

since there is only one feasible solution to the above system of linear equations.

Points are:

add more states (e.g. refuses offer, withdraws, etc)


15/18

time alteration of transition matrix e.g. better candidates apply earlier, only interview

early in the year, number of applications not spread evenly over the year

consider departmental pattern

classes of applicant (e.g. low fee/high fee)

analysis of results (e.g. how long wait for interview)


A company is considering using Markov theory to analyse brand switching between four

different brands of breakfast cereal (brands 1, 2, 3 and 4). An analysis of data has produced

the transition matrix shown below for the probability of switching each week between brands.

To brand

1 2 3 4

From brand 1 | 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.0 |

2 | 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.2 |

3 | 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.0 |

4 | 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.1 |

draw the state-transition diagram

what will be the market shares in week 3 if the current (week 1) market shares for the

four brands are 20%, 30%, 15%, 35% for brands 1, 2, 3, 4 respectively?

what is the long-run prediction for the market shares for each of the four brands?

would you expect the actual market shares to approach the long-run prediction for the

market or not (and why?)

what advantages and disadvantages can you think of in using Markov theory to

forecast market shares in brand switching?

Solution

State-transition diagram easy to draw.

Letting P represent the transition matrix given in the question we have that s 1 = [0.2, 0.3,

0.15, 0.35] and so

s2 = s1P = [0.485, 0.195, 0.225, 0.095] and s3 = s2P = [0.476, 0.1845, 0.291, 0.0485]

Note that the elements of s2 and s3 add to one.

Solve the simultaneous equations

[x1, x2, x3, x4] = [x1, x2, x3, x4](P)

and x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1

i.e. x1 = 0.5x1 + 0.7x3 + 0.8x4


16/18

x2 = 0.2x1 + 0.4x2 + 0.1x4

x3 = 0.3x1 + 0.4x2 + 0.3x3

x4 = 0.2x2 + 0.1x4

x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 = 1

The solution is x1 = 0.4879 x2 = 0.1689 x3 = 0.3056 x4 = 0.0375

Note, after solution, substitute these values back into the equations above to check that they

are consistent.

In general it takes a long time for the system to reach the long-run system state and hence we

would not expect that state ever to be reached (due to changing circumstances rendering the

transition matrix invalid). However note that in this particular example s 3 = the state of the

system after just 2 weeks (= [0.476, 0.1845, 0.291, 0.0485]) is close to the long-run systemstate and so it is likely that we will (effectively) reach the long-run prediction within a few

weeks.

Points to make include:

Markov theory simple to understand and apply

Markov theory gives us an insight into changes in the system over time

sensitivity calculations (i.e. "what-if" questions) are easily carried out

entrants to, and exits from, the market can be modelled

P may be dependent upon the current state of the system (i.e. the current market

share)

how do we cope with the effect of promotional (advertising) campaigns

Markov theory is only a simplified model of a complex decision-making process.


British Gas currently has three schemes for quarterly payment of gas bills, namely:

(1) cheque/cash payment

(2) credit card debit

(3) bank account direct debit

Their research department has estimated the following matrix of probabilities for switching

between schemes:

Will switch next


17/18

quarter to scheme

1 2 3

Currently pays by scheme 1 | 0.85 0.10 0.05 |

2 | 0.04 0.90 0.06 |

3 | 0.02 0.23 0.75 |

If 70% currently pay by scheme (1), 20% by scheme (2) and 10% by scheme (3) what will bethe corresponding percentages after:

two quarters; and

in the long-run.

Solution

Here we have a Markov process with three states where

s1 = [0.7, 0.2, 0.1]

and P = | 0.85 0.10 0.05 |

| 0.04 0.90 0.06 |

| 0.02 0.23 0.75 |

The state of the system after one quarter s2 = s1P

= [0.605, 0.273, 0.122]

Note that, as required, the elements of s2 sum to one. The state of the system after 2 quarters

s3 = s2P

= [0.52761, 0.33426, 0.13813]

Again note that the elements of s3 add to one.

Hence after two quarters the percentage paying by scheme (1) will be 52.761%, the

percentage paying by scheme (2) will be 33.426% and the percentage paying by scheme (3)

will be 13.813%.

To calculate the long-run situation let [x1,x2,x3] represent the long-run system state - then we

have that

[x1,x2,x3] = [x1,x2,x3](P)

where x1 + x2 + x3 = 1.

This gives us the four equations

x1 = 0.85x1 + 0.04x2 + 0.02x3

x2 = 0.10x1 + 0.90x2 + 0.23x3

x3 = 0.05x1 + 0.06x2 + 0.75x3


18/18

x1 + x2 + x3 = 1

Solving these four simultaneous equations gives

x1 = 0.1908, x2 = 0.6218 and x3 = 0.1874

Note that after solution we can substitute these values back into our four equations above to

check that these values are consistent with those equations.

Hence in the long-run the percentage paying by scheme (1) will be 19.08%, the percentage

paying by scheme (2) will be 62.18% and the percentage paying by scheme (3) will be

18.74%.

Markov Ug Exam Examples

Documents

Transcript of Markov Ug Exam Examples