Evidential reasoning approach

Last updated

In decision theory, the evidential reasoning approach (ER) is a generic evidence-based multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach for dealing with problems having both quantitative and qualitative criteria under various uncertainties including ignorance and randomness. It has been used to support various decision analysis, assessment and evaluation activities such as environmental impact assessment [1] and organizational self-assessment [2] based on a range of quality models.

Contents

Overview

The evidential reasoning approach has recently been developed on the basis of decision theory in particular utility theory, [3] artificial intelligence in particular the theory of evidence, [4] statistical analysis and computer technology. It uses a belief structure to model an assessment with uncertainty, a belief decision matrix to represent an MCDA problem under uncertainty, evidential reasoning algorithms [5] to aggregate criteria for generating distributed assessments, and the concepts of the belief and plausibility functions to generate a utility interval for measuring the degree of ignorance. A conventional decision matrix used for modeling an MCDA problem is a special case of a belief decision matrix. [6] [7]

The use of belief decision matrices for MCDA problem modelling in the ER approach results in the following features:

  1. An assessment of an option can be more reliably and realistically represented by a belief decision matrix than by a conventional decision matrix.
  2. It accepts data of different formats with various types of uncertainties as inputs, such as single numerical values, probability distributions, and subjective judgments with belief degrees.
  3. It allows all available information embedded in different data formats, including qualitative and incomplete data, to be maximally incorporated in assessment and decision making processes.
  4. It allows assessment outcomes to be represented more informatively.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dempster–Shafer theory</span> Mathematical framework to model epistemic uncertainty

The theory of belief functions, also referred to as evidence theory or Dempster–Shafer theory (DST), is a general framework for reasoning with uncertainty, with understood connections to other frameworks such as probability, possibility and imprecise probability theories. First introduced by Arthur P. Dempster in the context of statistical inference, the theory was later developed by Glenn Shafer into a general framework for modeling epistemic uncertainty—a mathematical theory of evidence. The theory allows one to combine evidence from different sources and arrive at a degree of belief that takes into account all the available evidence.

Critical thinking is the analysis of available facts, evidence, observations, and arguments to form a judgement. The subject is complex; several different definitions exist, which generally include the rational, skeptical, and unbiased analysis or evaluation of factual evidence. Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities as well as a commitment to overcome native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

Sensitivity analysis is the study of how the uncertainty in the output of a mathematical model or system can be divided and allocated to different sources of uncertainty in its inputs. A related practice is uncertainty analysis, which has a greater focus on uncertainty quantification and propagation of uncertainty; ideally, uncertainty and sensitivity analysis should be run in tandem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Multiple-criteria decision analysis</span> Operations research that evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making

Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) or multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a sub-discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making. Conflicting criteria are typical in evaluating options: cost or price is usually one of the main criteria, and some measure of quality is typically another criterion, easily in conflict with the cost. In purchasing a car, cost, comfort, safety, and fuel economy may be some of the main criteria we consider – it is unusual that the cheapest car is the most comfortable and the safest one. In portfolio management, managers are interested in getting high returns while simultaneously reducing risks; however, the stocks that have the potential of bringing high returns typically carry high risk of losing money. In a service industry, customer satisfaction and the cost of providing service are fundamental conflicting criteria.

Imprecise probability generalizes probability theory to allow for partial probability specifications, and is applicable when information is scarce, vague, or conflicting, in which case a unique probability distribution may be hard to identify. Thereby, the theory aims to represent the available knowledge more accurately. Imprecision is useful for dealing with expert elicitation, because:

Evidential reason or evidential reasoning may refer to:

A belief structure is a distributed assessment with beliefs.

A decision matrix is a list of values in rows and columns that allows an analyst to systematically identify, analyze, and rate the performance of relationships between sets of values and information. Elements of a decision matrix show decisions based on certain decision criteria. The matrix is useful for looking at large masses of decision factors and assessing each factor's relative significance by weighting them by importance.

In simple terms, risk is the possibility of something bad happening. Risk involves uncertainty about the effects/implications of an activity with respect to something that humans value, often focusing on negative, undesirable consequences. Many different definitions have been proposed. The international standard definition of risk for common understanding in different applications is “effect of uncertainty on objectives”.

Robust decision-making (RDM) is an iterative decision analytics framework that aims to help identify potential robust strategies, characterize the vulnerabilities of such strategies, and evaluate the tradeoffs among them. RDM focuses on informing decisions under conditions of what is called "deep uncertainty", that is, conditions where the parties to a decision do not know or do not agree on the system models relating actions to consequences or the prior probability distributions for the key input parameters to those models.

The weighted product model (WPM) is a popular multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) / multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) method. It is similar to the weighted sum model (WSM). The main difference is that instead of addition in the main mathematical operation, there is multiplication.

The decision-making paradox is a phenomenon related to decision-making and the quest for determining reliable decision-making methods. It was first described by Triantaphyllou, and has been recognized in the related literature as a fundamental paradox in multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) and decision analysis since then.

In multiple criteria decision aiding (MCDA), multicriteria classification involves problems where a finite set of alternative actions should be assigned into a predefined set of preferentially ordered categories (classes). For example, credit analysts classify loan applications into risk categories, customers rate products and classify them into attractiveness groups, candidates for a job position are evaluated and their applications are approved or rejected, technical systems are prioritized for inspection on the basis of their failure risk, clinicians classify patients according to the extent to which they have a complex disease or not, etc.

Probability bounds analysis (PBA) is a collection of methods of uncertainty propagation for making qualitative and quantitative calculations in the face of uncertainties of various kinds. It is used to project partial information about random variables and other quantities through mathematical expressions. For instance, it computes sure bounds on the distribution of a sum, product, or more complex function, given only sure bounds on the distributions of the inputs. Such bounds are called probability boxes, and constrain cumulative probability distributions.

Hiview3 is decision-making software that is based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM).

DecideIT is a decision-making software for the Microsoft Windows operating system. It is based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) and the multi-attribute value theory (MAVT). It supports both value tree analysis for multi-attribute decision problems as well as decision tree analysis for evaluating decisions under risk and can combine these structures in a common model.

D-Sight is a company that specializes in decision support software and associated services in the domains of project prioritization, supplier selection and collaborative decision-making. It was founded in 2010 as a spin-off from the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB). Their headquarters are located in Brussels, Belgium.

Intelligent Decision System (IDS) is a software package for multiple criteria decision analysis. It can handle hybrid types of uncertainty, including probability uncertainty, missing data, subjective judgements, interval data, and any combination of those types of uncertainty. It uses belief function for problem modelling and the Evidential Reasoning Approach for attribute aggregation. The outcomes of the analysis include not only ranking of alternative courses of action based on average scores, but also aggregated performance distribution of each alternative for supporting informed and transparent decision making.

Measuring attractiveness through a categorical-based evaluation technique (MACBETH) is a multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method that evaluates options against multiple criteria.

NUSAP is a notational system for the management and communication of uncertainty in science for policy, based on five categories for characterizing any quantitative statement: Numeral, Unit, Spread, Assessment and Pedigree. NUSAP was introduced by Silvio Funtowicz and Jerome Ravetz in the 1990 book Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. See also van der Sluijs et al. 2005.

References

  1. ↑ Wang Y.M.; Yang J.B.; Xu D.L. (2006). "Environmental Impact Assessment Using the Evidential Reasoning Approach". European Journal of Operational Research. 174 (3): 1885–1913. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.09.059.
  2. ↑ Siow C.H.R.; Yang J.B.; Dale B.G. (2001). "A new modelling framework for organisational self-assessment: development and application". Quality Management Journal. 8 (4): 34–47. doi:10.1080/10686967.2001.11918982.
  3. ↑ Keeney, R.L.; Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with Multiple Objectives. Cambridge University Press. ISBN   978-0-521-43883-4.
  4. ↑ Shafer, G.A. (1976). Mathematical Theory of Evidence . Princeton University Press. ISBN   978-0-691-08175-5.
  5. ↑ Yang J.B.; Xu D.L. (2002). "On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty". IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans. 32 (3): 289–304. doi:10.1109/TSMCA.2002.802746.
  6. ↑ Xu D.L.; Yang J.B.; Wang Y.M. (2006). "The ER approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainties". European Journal of Operational Research. 174 (3): 1914–43. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.02.064.
  7. ↑ Yang J.B.; Xu D.L. (2013). "Evidential Reasoning Rule for Evidence Combination". Artificial Intelligence. 205: 1–29. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2013.09.003 .
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.