Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T09:02:47.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Collision Avoidance as a Game of Co-ordination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 1981

W. P. Cannell
W. P. Cannell
Affiliation:
Department of Maritime Studies, Liverpool Polytechnic
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The literature of the recent past concerned with the collision avoidance regulations cannot be regarded as the model of rational scientific discussion. Subjective arguments based on personal experience of particular situations and very general mathematical analyses are pitted together without any generally accepted criteria by which to judge them. Obviously both mathematics and experience have great relevance to this geometrically simple, but operationally involved, problem. One step nearer a rational optimization of a set of regulations defining action during collision avoidance would be a formalization of the criteria a successful rule of the road must meet, and of the operational difficulties it faces. The present regulations, for instance, suffer from several logical inconsistencies which are difficult to describe in simple mathematical terms.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , May 1981, pp. 220 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1Bennett, P. G., (1977). Toward a theory of hypergames. Omega, 5, 749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Bennett, P. G., (1980). Hypergames: The Development of an Approach of Modelling Conflicts. Operations Research Dept., Sussex University.Google Scholar
3Bennett, P. G., (1979). Complex strategic analysis. A hypergame study of the fall of France. J. Opl. Res. Sco., 30, 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Calvert, E. S., (1960). Manoeuvres to ensure the avoidance of collision. This Journal, 13. 127.Google Scholar
5Calvert, E. S., (1973). Collision avoidance in a traffic system. This journal, 26, 137.Google Scholar
6Hollingdale, S. H., (1964). The effect of observational errors on the avoidance of collision. This Journal, 17, 345.Google Scholar
7Jones, K. D., (1974). Application of a manoeuvre diagram to multi-ship encounters. This Journal, 27, 19.Google Scholar
8Kemp, J. F., (1974). Factors in the prevention of collision at sea. Ph.D. Thesis, City of London Polytechnic.Google Scholar
9Lewis, D. K., (1969). Convention: A Philosophical Study. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
10Proctor, J. D., (1963). Anti-collision rules. This Journal, 16, 421.Google Scholar
11Schelling, T. C., (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar