IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tjorxx/v72y2021i4p889-907.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping conditional scenarios for knowledge structuring in (tail) dependence elicitation

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Werner
  • Tim Bedford
  • John Quigley

Abstract

In decision and risk analysis together with operational research methods, probabilistic modelling of uncertainties provides essential information for decision-makers. As uncertainties are typically not isolated and simplifying assumptions (such as independence) are often not justifiable, methods that model their dependence are being developed. A common challenge is that relevant historical data for specifying and quantifying a model are lacking. In this case, the dependence information should be elicited from experts. Guidance for eliciting dependence is sparse whereas particularly little research addresses the structuring of experts’ knowledge about dependence relationships prior to a quantitative elicitation. However, such preparation is crucial for developing confidence in the resulting judgements, mitigating biases and ensuring transparency, especially when assessing tail dependence. Therefore, we introduce a qualitative risk analysis method based on our definition of conditional scenarios that structures experts’ knowledge about (tail) dependence prior to its assessment. In an illustrative example, we show how to elicit conditional scenarios that support the assessment of a quantitative model for the complex risks of the UK higher education sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Werner & Tim Bedford & John Quigley, 2021. "Mapping conditional scenarios for knowledge structuring in (tail) dependence elicitation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(4), pages 889-907, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tjorxx:v:72:y:2021:i:4:p:889-907
    DOI: 10.1080/01605682.2019.1700767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01605682.2019.1700767
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01605682.2019.1700767?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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:tjorxx:v:72:y:2021:i:4:p:889-907. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tjor .

    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.