IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v49y2014icp53-59.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Establishing dominance between strategies with interval judgments of state probabilities

Author

Listed:
  • Ahn, Byeong Seok
  • Park, Haechurl

Abstract

In decision-making under uncertainty, a decision-maker is required to specify, possibly with the help of decision analysts, point estimates of the probabilities of uncertain events. In this setting, it is often difficult to obtain very precise measurements of the decision-maker׳s probabilities on the states of nature particularly when little information is available to evaluate probabilities, available information is not specific enough, or we have to model the conflict case where several information sources are available.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahn, Byeong Seok & Park, Haechurl, 2014. "Establishing dominance between strategies with interval judgments of state probabilities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 53-59.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:53-59
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2014.05.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048314000693
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2014.05.007?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. Pang, Jifang & Liang, Jiye, 2012. "Evaluation of the results of multi-attribute group decision-making with linguistic information," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 294-301.
    2. Jiménez, Antonio & Mateos, Alfonso & Sabio, Pilar, 2013. "Dominance intensity measure within fuzzy weight oriented MAUT: An application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 397-405.
    3. Guo, Peijun & Tanaka, Hideo, 2010. "Decision making with interval probabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 444-454, June.
    4. 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.
    5. Weber, Martin, 1987. "Decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 44-57, January.
    6. Sugihara, Kazutomi & Ishii, Hiroaki & Tanaka, Hideo, 2004. "Interval priorities in AHP by interval regression analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 745-754, November.
    7. Kreye, M.E. & Goh, Y.M. & Newnes, L.B. & Goodwin, P., 2012. "Approaches to displaying information to assist decisions under uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 682-692.
    8. Langewisch, Andrew & Choobineh, Fred, 1996. "Stochastic dominance tests for ranking alternatives under ambiguity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 139-154, November.
    9. Haines, Linda M., 1998. "A statistical approach to the analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements. (I). Distributions on feasible regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 112-125, October.
    10. Xu, Zeshui, 2005. "Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 249-254, June.
    11. Danielson, Mats & Ekenberg, Love, 2007. "Computing upper and lower bounds in interval decision trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 808-816, September.
    12. Roy, B. & Figueira, J.R. & Almeida-Dias, J., 2014. "Discriminating thresholds as a tool to cope with imperfect knowledge in multiple criteria decision aiding: Theoretical results and practical issues," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 9-20.
    13. Sevastjanov, P. & Figat, P., 2007. "Aggregation of aggregating modes in MCDM: Synthesis of Type 2 and Level 2 fuzzy sets," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 505-523, October.
    14. Arbel, Ami & Vargas, Luis G., 1993. "Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 200-209, September.
    15. Carrizosa, E. & Conde, E. & Fernandez, F. R. & Puerto, J., 1995. "Multi-criteria analysis with partial information about the weighting coefficients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 291-301, March.
    16. Danielson, Mats & Ekenberg, Love, 1998. "A framework for analysing decisions under risk," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 474-484, February.
    17. Peter C. Fishburn, 1965. "Analysis of Decisions with Incomplete Knowledge of Probabilities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 217-237, April.
    18. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    19. Arbel, Ami, 1989. "Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 317-326, December.
    20. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "A comparison of simplified value function approaches for treating uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 456-464.
    21. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    22. Marmol, Amparo M. & Puerto, Justo & Fernandez, Francisco R., 2002. "Sequential incorporation of imprecise information in multiple criteria decision processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 123-133, February.
    23. Curley, Shawn P. & Yates, J. Frank, 1985. "The center and range of the probability interval as factors affecting ambiguity preferences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 273-287, October.
    24. Kress, Moshe, 1991. "Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation -- a comment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 382-383, June.
    25. Stewart, Theodor J. & French, Simon & Rios, Jesus, 2013. "Integrating multicriteria decision analysis and scenario planning—Review and extension," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 679-688.
    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. Durbach, Ian N. & Calder, Jon M., 2016. "Modelling uncertainty in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 13-23.
    2. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    3. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    4. Li, Kevin W. & Wang, Zhou-Jing & Tong, Xiayu, 2016. "Acceptability analysis and priority weight elicitation for interval multiplicative comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 628-638.

    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. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    2. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    3. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    4. Wang, Zhou-Jing & Li, Kevin W., 2015. "A multi-step goal programming approach for group decision making with incomplete interval additive reciprocal comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 890-900.
    5. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    6. Mikhailov, L., 2002. "Fuzzy analytical approach to partnership selection in formation of virtual enterprises," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 393-401, October.
    7. Xu, Dong-Ling & Yang, Jian-Bo & Wang, Ying-Ming, 2006. "The evidential reasoning approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1914-1943, November.
    8. Mustajoki, Jyri & Hamalainen, Raimo P. & Lindstedt, Mats R.K., 2006. "Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 278-292, October.
    9. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2015. "Extreme point-based multi-attribute decision analysis with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 748-755.
    10. A Mateos & S Ríos-Insua & A Jiménez, 2007. "Dominance, potential optimality and alternative ranking in imprecise multi-attribute decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(3), pages 326-336, March.
    11. Wan, Shu-Ping & Li, Deng-Feng, 2013. "Fuzzy LINMAP approach to heterogeneous MADM considering comparisons of alternatives with hesitation degrees," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 925-940.
    12. Hahn, Eugene D., 2006. "Link function selection in stochastic multicriteria decision making models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(1), pages 86-100, July.
    13. Kim, Soung Hie & Han, Chang Hee, 2000. "Establishing dominance between alternatives with incomplete information in a hierarchically structured attribute tree," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 79-90, April.
    14. Haines, Linda M., 1998. "A statistical approach to the analytic hierarchy process with interval judgements. (I). Distributions on feasible regions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 112-125, October.
    15. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    16. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    17. Guo, Min & Yang, Jian-Bo & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Wang, Hongwei, 2007. "Evidential reasoning based preference programming for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(3), pages 1294-1312, November.
    18. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    19. Sun, Bingzhen & Ma, Weimin, 2015. "An approach to consensus measurement of linguistic preference relations in multi-attribute group decision making and application," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 83-92.
    20. Eduarda Asfora Frej & Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Ana Paula Cabral Seixas Costa, 2019. "Using data visualization for ranking alternatives with partial information and interactive tradeoff elicitation," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 909-931, December.

    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:jomega:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:53-59. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.