IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v16y2019i4p281-300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sparse Probability Assessment Heuristic Based on Orthogonal Matching Pursuit

Author

Listed:
  • Tao Huang

    (Operations Research & Industrial Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

  • J. Eric Bickel

    (Operations Research & Industrial Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

Abstract

Probability assessment via expert elicitation or statistical analysis is a critical step in the decision-analysis process. In many actual applications, the number of uncertainties and the corresponding number of assessments can be quite large. In these cases, the analyst may seek guidance in focusing the assessment on the most important uncertainties. In this paper, we develop a novel heuristic that we call the sparse probability assessment heuristic (SPAH). SPAH, which is based on a well-known method in machine learning known as orthogonal matching pursuit, seeks to identify the preferred alternative while conducting the fewest number of assessments. We test SPAH under a variety of conditions and compare its performance to standard practice. In so doing, we show that SPAH is able to identify the optimal alternative while requiring substantially fewer assessments than standard practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Tao Huang & J. Eric Bickel, 2019. "Sparse Probability Assessment Heuristic Based on Orthogonal Matching Pursuit," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 281-300, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:16:y:2019:i:4:p:281-300
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2019.0389
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2019.0389
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2019.0389?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Craig W. Kirkwood & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1985. "Ranking with Partial Information: A Method and an Application," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 38-48, February.
    3. Gordon B. Hazen, 1986. "Partial Information, Dominance, and Potential Optimality in Multiattribute Utility Theory," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 296-310, April.
    4. Peter C. Fishburn & Allan H. Murphy & Herbert H. Isaacs, 1968. "Sensitivity of Decisions to Probability Estimation Errors: A Reexamination," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 254-267, April.
    5. Robert T. Clemen & Terence Reilly, 1999. "Correlations and Copulas for Decision and Risk Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(2), pages 208-224, February.
    6. J. Eric Bickel & James E. Smith, 2006. "Optimal Sequential Exploration: A Binary Learning Model," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 16-32, March.
    7. Holloway, Hillary A. & White III, Chelsea C., 2003. "Question selection for multi-attribute decision-aiding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 148(3), pages 525-533, August.
    8. Park, Kyung Sam & Kim, Soung Hie, 1997. "Tools for interactive multiattribute decisionmaking with incompletely identified information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 111-123, April.
    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. Vicki M. Bier & Simon French, 2020. "From the Editors: Decision Analysis Focus and Trends," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 1-8, March.

    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. Luis V. Montiel & J. Eric Bickel, 2014. "A Generalized Sampling Approach for Multilinear Utility Functions Given Partial Preference Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 147-170, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Liesio, Juuso & Mild, Pekka & Salo, Ahti, 2007. "Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1488-1505, September.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Antti Punkka & Ahti Salo, 2014. "Scale Dependence and Ranking Intervals in Additive Value Models Under Incomplete Preference Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 83-104, June.
    7. Ahn, Byeong Seok & Sam Park, Kyung & Hee Han, Chang & Kyeong Kim, Jae, 2000. "Multi-attribute decision aid under incomplete information and hierarchical structure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 431-439, September.
    8. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2017. "Deriving rankings from incomplete preference information: A comparison of different approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(1), pages 244-253.
    9. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    10. K S Park & I Jeong, 2011. "How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1771-1783, October.
    11. Salo, Ahti & Punkka, Antti, 2005. "Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 338-356, June.
    12. Kim, Soung Hie & Ahn, Byeong Seok, 1999. "Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 498-507, August.
    13. Mattila, V. & Virtanen, K., 2015. "Ranking and selection for multiple performance measures using incomplete preference information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 568-579.
    14. 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.
    15. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2014. "Decision making under uncertainty with unknown utility function and rank-ordered probabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 537-541.
    16. Ichiro Nishizaki & Tomohiro Hayashida & Masakazu Ohmi, 2016. "Multiattribute decision analysis using strict preference relations," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 379-400, October.
    17. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 1998. "Multicriteria aid for agricultural decisions using preference relations: methodology and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 483-503, December.
    18. Juho Kokkala & Kimmo Berg & Kai Virtanen & Jirka Poropudas, 2019. "Rationalizable strategies in games with incomplete preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 185-204, March.
    19. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    20. 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.

    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:inm:ordeca:v:16:y:2019:i:4:p:281-300. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.