IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v239y2014i2p490-503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-network polynomials and the sensitivity of decision-support models

Author

Listed:
  • Borgonovo, Emanuele
  • Tonoli, Fabio

Abstract

Decision makers benefit from the utilization of decision-support models in several applications. Obtaining managerial insights is essential to better inform the decision-process. This work offers an in-depth investigation into the structural properties of decision-support models. We show that the input–output mapping in influence diagrams, decision trees and decision networks is piecewise multilinear. The conditions under which sensitivity information cannot be extracted through differentiation are examined in detail. By complementing high-order derivatives with finite change sensitivity indices, we obtain a systematic approach that allows analysts to gain a wide range of managerial insights. A well-known case study in the medical sector illustrates the findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Borgonovo, Emanuele & Tonoli, Fabio, 2014. "Decision-network polynomials and the sensitivity of decision-support models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 490-503.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:239:y:2014:i:2:p:490-503
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.05.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221714004226
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2014.05.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steffen L. Lauritzen & Dennis Nilsson, 2001. "Representing and Solving Decision Problems with Limited Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1235-1251, September.
    2. Herbert Moskowitz & Paul V. Preckel & Aynang Yang, 1993. "Decision Analysis with Incomplete Utility and Probability Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 864-879, October.
    3. Prakash P. Shenoy, 1992. "Valuation-Based Systems for Bayesian Decision Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 463-484, June.
    4. E. Borgonovo & L. Peccati, 2010. "Moment calculations for piecewise-defined functions: an application to stochastic optimization with coherent risk measures," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 235-258, April.
    5. Gordon B. Hazen, 1986. "Partial Information, Dominance, and Potential Optimality in Multiattribute Utility Theory," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 296-310, April.
    6. Cobb, Barry R. & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2008. "Decision making with hybrid influence diagrams using mixtures of truncated exponentials," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 261-275, April.
    7. Concha Bielza & Prakash P. Shenoy, 1999. "A Comparison of Graphical Techniques for Asymmetric Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1552-1569, November.
    8. Ross D. Shachter & C. Robert Kenley, 1989. "Gaussian Influence Diagrams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(5), pages 527-550, May.
    9. Ross D. Shachter, 1986. "Evaluating Influence Diagrams," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 871-882, December.
    10. Ted G. Eschenbach, 1992. "Spiderplots versus Tornado Diagrams for Sensitivity Analysis," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 40-46, December.
    11. E. Borgonovo & C. L. Smith, 2011. "A Study of Interactions in the Risk Assessment of Complex Engineering Systems: An Application to Space PSA," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 59(6), pages 1461-1476, December.
    12. Ronald A. Howard, 1988. "Decision Analysis: Practice and Promise," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 679-695, June.
    13. Debarun Bhattacharjya & Ross D. Shachter, 2012. "Formulating Asymmetric Decision Problems as Decision Circuits," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 138-145, June.
    14. Craig W. Kirkwood, 1993. "An Algebraic Approach to Formulating and Solving Large Models for Sequential Decisions Under Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(7), pages 900-913, July.
    15. Demirer, Riza & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2006. "Sequential valuation networks for asymmetric decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 286-309, February.
    16. Zvi Covaliu & Robert M. Oliver, 1995. "Representation and Solution of Decision Problems Using Sequential Decision Diagrams," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(12), pages 1860-1881, December.
    17. Liesiö, Juuso & Salo, Ahti, 2012. "Scenario-based portfolio selection of investment projects with incomplete probability and utility information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 217(1), pages 162-172.
    18. Borgonovo, E., 2010. "Sensitivity analysis with finite changes: An application to modified EOQ models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 127-138, January.
    19. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    20. Ross D. Shachter, 1988. "Probabilistic Inference and Influence Diagrams," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 589-604, August.
    21. Bielza, Concha & Gómez, Manuel & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2011. "A review of representation issues and modeling challenges with influence diagrams," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 227-241, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Decision analysis under ambiguity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(3), pages 823-836.
    2. Salo, Ahti & Andelmin, Juho & Oliveira, Fabricio, 2022. "Decision programming for mixed-integer multi-stage optimization under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 550-565.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bielza, Concha & Gómez, Manuel & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2011. "A review of representation issues and modeling challenges with influence diagrams," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 227-241, June.
    2. Concha Bielza & Prakash P. Shenoy, 1999. "A Comparison of Graphical Techniques for Asymmetric Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(11), pages 1552-1569, November.
    3. Salo, Ahti & Andelmin, Juho & Oliveira, Fabricio, 2022. "Decision programming for mixed-integer multi-stage optimization under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 550-565.
    4. Finn Jensen & Thomas Nielsen, 2013. "Probabilistic decision graphs for optimization under uncertainty," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 204(1), pages 223-248, April.
    5. Prakash Shenoy, 1998. "Game Trees For Decision Analysis," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 149-171, April.
    6. Yijing Li & Prakash P. Shenoy, 2012. "A Framework for Solving Hybrid Influence Diagrams Containing Deterministic Conditional Distributions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(1), pages 55-75, March.
    7. C. L. Smith & E. Borgonovo, 2007. "Decision Making During Nuclear Power Plant Incidents—A New Approach to the Evaluation of Precursor Events," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1027-1042, August.
    8. Demirer, Riza & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2006. "Sequential valuation networks for asymmetric decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 286-309, February.
    9. Thwaites, Peter A. & Smith, Jim Q., 2018. "A graphical method for simplifying Bayesian games," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 3-11.
    10. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Plischke, Elmar, 2016. "Sensitivity analysis: A review of recent advances," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 869-887.
    11. Cobb, Barry R. & Shenoy, Prakash P., 2008. "Decision making with hybrid influence diagrams using mixtures of truncated exponentials," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 261-275, April.
    12. Shenoy, Prakash P., 2000. "Valuation network representation and solution of asymmetric decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 579-608, March.
    13. González-Ortega, Jorge & Ríos Insua, David & Cano, Javier, 2019. "Adversarial risk analysis for bi-agent influence diagrams: An algorithmic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1085-1096.
    14. Apiruk Detwarasiti & Ross D. Shachter, 2005. "Influence Diagrams for Team Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(4), pages 207-228, December.
    15. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    16. Lopez-Diaz, Miguel & Rodriguez-Muniz, Luis J., 2007. "Influence diagrams with super value nodes involving imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 203-219, May.
    17. John M. Charnes & Prakash P. Shenoy, 2004. "Multistage Monte Carlo Method for Solving Influence Diagrams Using Local Computation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 405-418, March.
    18. Barry R. Cobb, 2007. "Influence Diagrams with Continuous Decision Variables and Non-Gaussian Uncertainties," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 136-155, September.
    19. Ruth Y. Dicdican & Yacov Y. Haimes, 2005. "Relating multiobjective decision trees to the multiobjective risk impact analysis method," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 95-108.
    20. Debarun Bhattacharjya & Ross D. Shachter, 2012. "Formulating Asymmetric Decision Problems as Decision Circuits," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 138-145, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:239:y:2014:i:2:p:490-503. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.