IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v9y2012i2p165-171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating Autonomous Agents Facing Conflicting Objectives: A Command and Control Example

Author

Listed:
  • Jim Q. Smith

    (University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom)

  • Lorraine Dodd

    (Cranfield University, Shrivenham, Swindon SN6 8LA, United Kingdom)

Abstract

Military commanders in the United Kingdom have a degree of devolved decision authority delegated from command and control (C2) regulators and are trained and expected to act rationally and accountably. Recent experimental results suggest that experienced commanders usually appear to act as if they are subjective expected utility maximizers. The only scenarios where this appears not to be so are when the immediate mission objectives conflict with broader campaign objectives. Then the apparent rationality of even experienced commanders often evaporates. In this paper we show that if the C2 regulator assumes her commander is expected utility maximizing and that he uses a suitable multiattribute utility function, then even when she is remote from the field of action and her information is sparse, this regulator can nevertheless predict when scenarios might lead her commanders into making irrational decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jim Q. Smith & Lorraine Dodd, 2012. "Regulating Autonomous Agents Facing Conflicting Objectives: A Command and Control Example," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 165-171, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:9:y:2012:i:2:p:165-171
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.1120.0240
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1120.0240
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.1120.0240?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. Smith, J. Q. & Harrison, P. J. & Zeeman, E. C., 1981. "The analysis of some discontinuous decision processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 30-43, May.
    2. L Dodd & J Moffat & J Smith, 2006. "Discontinuity in decision-making when objectives conflict: a military command decision case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(6), pages 643-654, June.
    3. J Moffat & S Witty, 2002. "Bayesian decision making and military command and control," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 53(7), pages 709-718, July.
    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. Jason R. W. Merrick & Fabrizio Ruggeri & Refik Soyer & L. Robin Keller, 2012. "From the Editors---Games and Decisions in Reliability and Risk," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 81-85, June.
    2. Lorraine Dodd, 2019. "Choice-making and choose-ables: making decision agents more human and choosy," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(1), pages 101-115, May.

    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. L Dodd & J Moffat & J Smith, 2006. "Discontinuity in decision-making when objectives conflict: a military command decision case study," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(6), pages 643-654, June.
    2. Kalloniatis, Alexander C. & McLennan-Smith, Timothy A. & Roberts, Dale O., 2020. "Modelling distributed decision-making in Command and Control using stochastic network synchronisation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(2), pages 588-603.
    3. J Medhurst & I M Stanton & H Bird & A Berry, 2009. "The value of information to decision makers: an experimental approach using card-based decision gaming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(6), pages 747-757, June.
    4. J Medhurst & I Stanton & A Berry, 2010. "Risk taking by decision makers—using card-based decision gaming to develop models of behaviour," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(11), pages 1561-1571, November.
    5. repec:zbw:bofrdp:1990_011 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Mike Metcalfe, 2013. "A Pragmatic System of Decision Criteria," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 56-64, January.
    7. Strong, Peter & Shenvi, Aditi & Yu, Xuewen & Papamichail, K. Nadia & Wynn, Henry P. & Smith, Jim Q., 2023. "Building a Bayesian decision support system for evaluating COVID-19 countermeasure strategies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113632, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Lorraine Dodd, 2019. "Choice-making and choose-ables: making decision agents more human and choosy," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 7(1), pages 101-115, May.
    9. Koskela, Erkki & Virén, Matti, 1990. "Monetary policy reaction functions and saving-investment correlations: Some cross-country evidence," Research Discussion Papers 11/1990, Bank of Finland.
    10. Tong, Howell, 2015. "Threshold models in time series analysis—Some reflections," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 189(2), pages 485-491.
    11. Koskela, Erkki & Virén, Matti, 1990. "Monetary policy reaction functions and saving-investment correlations: Some cross-country evidence," Bank of Finland Research Discussion Papers 11/1990, Bank of Finland.
    12. Moffat, James & Medhurst, John, 2009. "Modelling of human decision-making in simulation models of conflict using experimental gaming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1147-1157, August.
    13. W Hobbs & N J Curtis, 2011. "Theory and application of perceptual positions to data collection and analysis in military environments," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(9), pages 1753-1764, September.

    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:9:y:2012:i:2:p:165-171. 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.