IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orinte/v35y2005i1p88-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The United States and Russia Evaluate Plutonium Disposition Options with Multiattribute Utility Theory

Author

Listed:
  • John C. Butler

    (Fisher School of Business, Ohio State University, 2100 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210)

  • Alexander N. Chebeskov

    (Department for Nuclear Power and Plutonium Disposition, Institute for Physics and Power Engineering, Obninsk Kaluga Region, Bondarenko Square 1, 249033 Russia)

  • James S. Dyer

    (Department of Management Science and Information Systems, McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

  • Thomas A. Edmunds

    (Systems and Decision Sciences Section, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 7000 East Avenue, Livermore, California 94550)

  • Jianmin Jia

    (Faculty of Business Administration, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong, China)

  • Vladimir I. Oussanov

    (Institute for Physics and Power Engineering, Obninsk Kaluga Region, Bondarenko Square 1, 249033 Russia)

Abstract

At the end of the Cold War, the United States and Russia entered into agreements to reduce the numbers of nuclear weapons in their arsenals. The excess-weapons plutonium recovered from dismantled weapons is extremely toxic in the environment, and the National Academy of Sciences has characterized the possibility that it could fall into the hands of terrorists as a “clear and present danger.” A team of operations research analysts supported the Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) in the US Department of Energy (DOE) by developing a multiattribute utility (MAU) model to evaluate alternatives for the disposition of the excess-weapons plutonium. Russian scientists modified the model with the aid of the US team and used it to evaluate Russia's disposition alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • John C. Butler & Alexander N. Chebeskov & James S. Dyer & Thomas A. Edmunds & Jianmin Jia & Vladimir I. Oussanov, 2005. "The United States and Russia Evaluate Plutonium Disposition Options with Multiattribute Utility Theory," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 88-101, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orinte:v:35:y:2005:i:1:p:88-101
    DOI: 10.1287/inte.1040.0112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/inte.1040.0112
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/inte.1040.0112?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. James S. Dyer & Thomas Edmunds & John C. Butler & Jianmin Jia, 1998. "A Multiattribute Utility Analysis of Alternatives for the Disposition of Surplus Weapons-Grade Plutonium," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 749-762, December.
    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. Roger Chapman Burk & Richard M. Nehring, 2023. "An Empirical Comparison of Rank-Based Surrogate Weights in Additive Multiattribute Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 55-72, March.
    2. Jyrki Wallenius & James S. Dyer & Peter C. Fishburn & Ralph E. Steuer & Stanley Zionts & Kalyanmoy Deb, 2008. "Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1336-1349, July.
    3. P. Daniel Wright & Matthew J. Liberatore & Robert L. Nydick, 2006. "A Survey of Operations Research Models and Applications in Homeland Security," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 514-529, December.

    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. P. Daniel Wright & Matthew J. Liberatore & Robert L. Nydick, 2006. "A Survey of Operations Research Models and Applications in Homeland Security," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 514-529, December.
    2. Donald L. Keefer & Craig W. Kirkwood & James L. Corner, 2004. "Perspective on Decision Analysis Applications, 1990–2001," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 4-22, March.
    3. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Bert De Reyck & Zeger Degraeve, 2008. "An Integrated Decision-Making Approach for Improving European Air Traffic Management," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(8), pages 1395-1409, August.
    4. Yael Grushka-Cockayne & Bert De Reyck, 2009. "Towards a Single European Sky," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 400-414, October.
    5. McCarthy, Ryan & Ogden, Joan M. & Sperling, Dan, 2008. "Assessing Reliability in Energy Supply Systems," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1dx4j35q, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    6. Price, Robert R. & Singh, Bhupinder P. & MacKinnon, Robert J. & David Sevougian, S., 2013. "The application of systems engineering principles to the prioritization of sustainable nuclear fuel cycle options," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 205-217.
    7. Han Bleichrodt & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2009. "Additive Utility in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(5), pages 863-873, May.
    8. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    9. McCarthy, Ryan W. & Ogden, Joan M. & Sperling, Daniel, 2007. "Assessing reliability in energy supply systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 2151-2162, April.
    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. John C. Butler & James S. Dyer & Jianmin Jia, 2006. "Using Attributes to Predict Objectives in Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 100-116, June.
    12. Abdildin, Yerkin G. & Abbas, Ali E., 2016. "Analysis of decision alternatives of the deep borehole filter restoration problem," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 1306-1321.
    13. John Butler & Douglas J. Morrice & Peter W. Mullarkey, 2001. "A Multiple Attribute Utility Theory Approach to Ranking and Selection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(6), pages 800-816, 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:inm:orinte:v:35:y:2005:i:1:p:88-101. 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.