Nonlinear Dynamics

, Volume 81, Issue 1–2, pp 967–979 | Cite as

Nonlinear dynamics and convergence speed of heterogeneous Cournot duopolies involving best response mechanisms with different degrees of rationality

  • Fausto Cavalli
  • Ahmad Naimzada
Original Paper


In this paper, we propose and compare three heterogeneous Cournotian duopolies, in which players adopt best response mechanisms based on different degrees of rationality. The economic setting we assume is described by an isoelastic demand function with constant marginal costs. In particular, we study the effect of the rationality degree on stability and convergence speed to the equilibrium output. We study conditions required to converge to the Nash equilibrium and the possible route to destabilization when such conditions are violated, showing that a more elevated degree of rationality of a single player does not always guarantee an improved stability. We show that the considered duopolies exhibit either a flip or a Neimark–Sacker bifurcation. In particular, in heterogeneous oligopolies models, the Neimark–Sacker bifurcation usually arises in the presence of a player adopting gradient-like decisional mechanisms, and not best response heuristic, as shown in the present case. Moreover, we show that the cost ratio crucially influences not only the size of the stability region, but also the speed of convergence toward the equilibrium.


Cournot duopoly game Best response mechanism Bounded rationality Heterogeneous players Bifurcation Complex dynamics 


  1. 1.
    Agiza, H.N., Elsadany, A.A.: Nonlinear dynamics in the Cournot duopoly game with heterogeneous players. Phys. A 320, 512–524 (2003)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agiza, H.N., Elsadany, A.A.: Chaotic dynamics in nonlinear duopoly game with heterogeneous players. Appl. Math. Comput. 149(3), 843–860 (2004)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agiza, H.N., Hegazi, A.S., Elsadany, A.A.: Complex dynamics and synchronization of a duopoly game with bounded rationality. Math. Comput. Simul. 58(2), 133–146 (2002)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Angelini, N., Dieci, R., Nardini, F.: Bifurcation analysis of a dynamic duopoly model with heterogeneous costs and behavioural rules. Math. Comput. Simul. 79(10), 3179–3196 (2009)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Askar, S.S.: The rise of complex phenomena in Cournot duopoly games due to demand functions without inflection points. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 19(6), 1918–1925 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bischi, G.I., Gallegati, M., Naimzada, A.: Symmetry-breaking bifurcations and representative firm in dynamic duopoly games. Ann. Oper. Res. 89, 253–272 (1999)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bischi, G.I., Kopel, M., Naimzada, A.: On a rent-seeking game described by a non-invertible iterated map with denominator. Nonlinear Anal. 47(8), 5309–5324 (2001)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bischi, G.I., Naimzada, A.: Global analysis of a dynamic duopoly game with bounded rationality. In: J. Filar, V. Gaitsgory, K. Mizukami (eds.) Advance in Dynamics Games and Applications, 7th International Symposium on Dynamics Games and Applications, pp. 361–385. Shonan Village Ctr (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bischi, G.I., Naimzada, A., Sbragia, L.: Oligopoly games with local monopolistic approximation. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 62(3), 371–388 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cavalli, F., Naimzada, A.: A cournot duopoly game with heterogeneous players: nonlinear dynamics of the gradient rule versus local monopolistic approach. Appl. Math. Comput. 249, 382–388 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cavalli, F., Naimzada, A., Tramontana, F.: Nonlinear dynamics and global analysis of an heterogeneous cournot duopoly with a local monopolistic approach versus a gradient rule with endogenous reactivity. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 23(1–3), 245–262 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cournot, A.A.: Researches into the Principles of the Theory of Wealth. Engl. Trans., Irwin Paper Back Classics in Economics (1963)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Den-Haan, W.J.: The importance of the number of different agents in a heterogeneous asset-pricing model. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 25(5), 721–746 (2001)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubiel-Teleszynski, T.: Nonlinear dynamics in a heterogeneous duopoly game with adjusting players and diseconomies of scale. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 16(1), 296–308 (2011)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Elsadany, A.A., Tramontana, F.: Heterogeneous triopoly game with isoelastic demand function. Nonlinear Dyn. 68(1–2), 187–193 (2012)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gao, X., Zhong, W., Mei, S.: Nonlinear cournot oligopoly games with isoelastic demand function: the effects of different behavior rules. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 17(12), 5249–5255 (2012)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leonard, D., Nishimura, K.: Nonlinear dynamics in the cournot model without full information. Ann. Oper. Res. 89, 165–173 (1999)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, T., Ma, J.: The complex dynamics of rc̣ompetition models of three oligarchs with heterogeneous players. Nonlinear Dyn. 74(1–2), 45–54 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ma, J., Wu, F.: The application and complexity analysis about a high-dimension discrete dynamical system based on heterogeneous triopoly game with multi-product. Nonlinear Dyn. 77(3), 781–792 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Naimzada, A., Ricchiuti, G.: Monopoly with local knowledge of demand function. Econ. Model. 28(1–2), 299–307 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Naimzada, A., Sbragia, L.: Oligopoly games with nonlinear demand and cost functions: two boundedly rational adjustment processes. Chaos Solitons Fractals 29(3), 707–722 (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Naimzada, A., Tramontana, F.: Controlling chaos through local knowledge. Chaos Solitons Fractals 42(4), 2439–2449 (2009)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Poston, T., Stewart, I.: Catastrophe theory and its applications. Pitman Ltd, London (1978)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Puu, T.: Chaos in duopoly pricing. Chaos Solitons Fractals 1(6), 573–581 (1991)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Quarteroni, A., Sacco, R., Saleri, F.: Numerical Mathematics, Texts in Applied Mathematics, vol. 37, second edn. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rand, D.: Exotic phenomena in games and duopoly models. J. Math. Econ. 5(2), 173–184 (1978)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Silvestre, J.: A model of general equilibrium with monopolistic behavior. J. Econ. Theory 16, 425–442 (1977)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tramontana, F.: Heterogeneous duopoly with isoelastic demand function. Econ. Model. 27(1), 350–357 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tuinstra, J.: A price adjustment process in a model of monopolistic competition. Int. Game Theory Rev. 6(3), 417–442 (2004)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics, Management and StatisticsUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations