| 1. |
- Idefeldt, Jim, et al.
(author)
-
Preference ordering algorithms with imprecise expectations
- 2006
-
In: Lect. Notes Eng. Comput. Sci.. - 9789889867133 ; , s. 750-755, s. 750-755
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In imprecise domains the preference order of the alternatives is not straightforward to establish, due to possible overlapping of expected values among the alternatives. Nevertheless, such rankings are useful in decision analysis applications, as obtaining a ranking of alternatives is a way to gain an overview of the situation. The rankings presented in this paper represent overviews of a preference order of the alternatives based on their respective expected utility. The ranking can be either ordinal, focusing only on the ordering, or cardinal, also taking the differences in expected utility into account. The first set of procedures discussed is a cardinal ranking, which provides the user with expected utility intervals of the evaluated alternatives. This yields a more extensive overview with more detailed information. The second set of procedures discussed ordinal rankings of the alternatives based on three different approaches; 1) contraction based ranking, 2) intersection based ranking, and 3) focal point based ranking with indifference level. Finally, we show that regardless of ranking method their respective maximal elements all conform to the maximal element of the ordinal ranking. Hence, if the intention is to find a maximal element, it is sufficient to use either pointwise cardinal ranking or ordinal ranking with zero as indifference level.
|
|
| 2. |
- Larsson, Aron, et al.
(author)
-
Representation and Evaluation of Influence Diagrams in a Common Framework for Interval Decision Analysis
- 2006
-
In: Proceedings of IMECS 2006. - 9889867133 ; , s. 738-743
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper present a method for inclusion of influence diagrams within a common framework for analysing decisions under risk supporting interval-valued user statements. The method of inclusion support both modeling and evaluation, and the evaluation is performed through a conversion of influence diagrams into decision tree frames holding symmetric decision trees. The qualitative and explicit modeling of probabilistic independence cause implicit comparative constraints between variables, constraints which must not be violated in order to obtain correct evaluation results.
|
|
| 3. |
- Riabacke, Ari, et al.
(author)
-
A study about different strategies in risk elicitation
- 2006
-
In: Lect. Notes Eng. Comput. Sci.. - 9789889867133 ; , s. 1-6, s. 1-6
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper presents a study focusing on deviations from normative behavior in risk elicitation. Such deviations have implications on the process of eliciting reliable input data in applications of decision analysis. No existing elicitation method seems to be universally useful based on the findings made in this study. Since people obviously do not act in accordance with the normative rules, and different choice strategies have been identified, a prescriptive approach with individual assistance of the decision makers in the elicitation process thus seems to be necessary.
|
|
| 4. |
- Riabacke, Ari
(author)
-
Computer Based Prescriptive Support : a study about decision making under risk
- 2006
-
In: Proceedings of IMECS 2006. - 9889867133 ; , s. 23-28
-
Conference paper (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This paper focuses on managerial decision making under risk and uncertainty. Since no one, so far, has studied managers' risk attitudes in parallel with their actual behavior when handling risky prospects the area still remains relatively murky. Interviews have been done with 12 managers in the Swedish forest industry concerning how they define risk, how they handle risk, how they make risky decisions, and how the organizational context affects the decision-making process. Problems that have been identified in this study are the lack of information and precise objective data, that risk and probability estimations made by the managers are often based on inadequate information and intuition, that no formal analysis is carried out, that no computer based decision tools are used in the decision making processes, and therefore most decisions are based on intuition and gut feeling.
|
|
