IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v11y2014i3p204-212.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing Interval-Valued Decision Trees to Conventional Ones: Comments on Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives

Author

Listed:
  • Yongzhi Cao

    (School of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science, and Key Laboratory of High Confidence Software Technologies, Ministry of Education, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China)

Abstract

Decision trees are an excellent tool for choosing between alternatives, where the likely financial outcomes of making a particular decision are usually measured by real numbers. To describe the uncertainty of outcomes, the notion of interval-valued decision trees was recently introduced, where only the lower and upper bounds of an outcome, described by an interval, are known. To address the difficulty of an interval-valued comparison of alternatives, several decision rules, including the Laplace and Hurwicz rules, have been discussed in the literature. In this paper, we show that in terms of such decision rules, the decision making for interval-valued decision trees can be equivalently reduced to real-valued ones, which means that an alternative is chosen at some decision node in the original interval-valued decision tree if and only if it is chosen at the same decision node in the corresponding real-valued decision tree. In this way, we develop an approach to solving interval-valued decision tree problems with the analysis technique for traditional decision trees.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongzhi Cao, 2014. "Reducing Interval-Valued Decision Trees to Conventional Ones: Comments on Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 204-212, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:11:y:2014:i:3:p:204-212
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2014.0294
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.2014.0294
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2014.0294?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. Taleb, Nassim Nicholas, 2007. "Black Swans and the Domains of Statistics," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 61, pages 198-200, August.
    2. Sengupta, Atanu & Pal, Tapan Kumar, 2000. "On comparing interval numbers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(1), pages 28-43, November.
    3. Kash Barker & Kaycee J. Wilson, 2012. "Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 348-358, December.
    4. Richard F. Hespos & Paul A. Strassmann, 1965. "Stochastic Decision Trees for the Analysis of Investment Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(10), pages 244-259, August.
    5. Kenneth C. Lichtendahl & Samuel E. Bodily, 2012. "Multiplicative Utilities for Health and Consumption," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 314-328, December.
    6. Nathan Huntley & Matthias Troffaes, 2012. "Normal form backward induction for decision trees with coherent lower previsions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 111-134, May.
    7. Kash Barker & Claudio Rocco S., 2011. "Evaluating Uncertainty In Risk-Based Interdependency Modeling With Interval Arithmetic," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 213-232.
    8. Ralph L. Keeney, 2013. "Foundations for Group Decision Analysis," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 103-120, June.
    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. Bogumił Kamiński & Michał Jakubczyk & Przemysław Szufel, 2018. "A framework for sensitivity analysis of decision trees," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 135-159, March.
    2. Sarat Sivaprasad & Cameron A. MacKenzie, 2018. "The Hurwicz Decision Rule’s Relationship to Decision Making with the Triangle and Beta Distributions and Exponential Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 139-153, September.
    3. Theodore T. Allen & Zhenhuan Sui & Nathan L. Parker, 2017. "Timely Decision Analysis Enabled by Efficient Social Media Modeling," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 250-260, 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. Kash Barker & Kaycee J. Wilson, 2012. "Decision Trees with Single and Multiple Interval-Valued Objectives," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 348-358, December.
    2. Bogumił Kamiński & Michał Jakubczyk & Przemysław Szufel, 2018. "A framework for sensitivity analysis of decision trees," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(1), pages 135-159, March.
    3. Andrea C. Hupman & Jay Simon, 2023. "The Legacy of Peter Fishburn: Foundational Work and Lasting Impact," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 1-15, March.
    4. L. Robin Keller & Ali Abbas & J. Eric Bickel & Vicki M. Bier & David V. Budescu & John C. Butler & Enrico Diecidue & Robin L. Dillon-Merrill & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl & Jason R. W, 2012. "From the Editors ---Brainstorming, Multiplicative Utilities, Partial Information on Probabilities or Outcomes, and Regulatory Focus," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 297-302, December.
    5. Parrini, Alessandro, 2013. "Importance Sampling for Portfolio Credit Risk in Factor Copula Models," MPRA Paper 103745, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Child, K. & Desta, G. & Douthwaite, B. & Haileslassie, Amare & van Rooyen, A. & Tamene, L. & Uhlenbrook, Stefan, 2021. "Impact tracking: a practitioner-developed approach to scaling agricultural innovation in Ethiopia," IWMI Books, Reports H050789, International Water Management Institute.
    7. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    8. Flyvbjerg, Bent & Ansar, Atif & Budzier, Alexander & Buhl, Søren & Cantarelli, Chantal & Garbuio, Massimo & Glenting, Carsten & Holm, Mette Skamris & Lovallo, Dan & Molin, Eric & Rønnest, Arne & Stewa, 2019. "On de-bunking “Fake News” in the post-truth era: How to reduce statistical error in research," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 409-411.
    9. Ivan Faiella & Luciano Lavecchia, 2012. "Costs and benefits of relaunching nuclear energy in Italy," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 114, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    10. Ed Cook & Jason R. W. Merrick, 2023. "Technology Implementation at Capital One," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 178-191, May.
    11. Majumdar, J. & Bhunia, A.K., 2007. "Elitist genetic algorithm for assignment problem with imprecise goal," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 684-692, March.
    12. Gallus, Jana & Bhatia, Sudeep, 2020. "Gender, power and emotions in the collaborative production of knowledge: A large-scale analysis of Wikipedia editor conversations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 115-130.
    13. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    14. Sevastjanov, P. & Figat, P., 2007. "Aggregation of aggregating modes in MCDM: Synthesis of Type 2 and Level 2 fuzzy sets," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 505-523, October.
    15. Sheaves, Marcus & Brookes, Justin & Coles, Rob & Freckelton, Marnie & Groves, Paul & Johnston, Ross & Winberg, Pia, 2014. "Repair and revitalisation of Australia׳s tropical estuaries and coastal wetlands: Opportunities and constraints for the reinstatement of lost function and productivity," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 23-38.
    16. Robin Gregory & Ralph L. Keeney, 2017. "A Practical Approach to Address Uncertainty in Stakeholder Deliberations," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 487-501, March.
    17. Li, Mo & Fu, Qiang & Singh, Vijay P. & Liu, Dong & Li, Jiang, 2020. "Optimization of sustainable bioenergy production considering energy-food-water-land nexus and livestock manure under uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    18. Fujun Hou, 2015. "A Consensus Gap Indicator and Its Application to Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 415-428, May.
    19. Cerqueti, Roy & Ciciretti, Rocco & Dalò, Ambrogio & Nicolosi, Marco, 2022. "A new measure of the resilience for networks of funds with applications to socially responsible investments," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 593(C).
    20. Zhang-peng Tian & Hong-yu Zhang & Jing Wang & Jian-qiang Wang & Xiao-hong Chen, 2016. "Multi-criteria decision-making method based on a cross-entropy with interval neutrosophic sets," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(15), pages 3598-3608, November.

    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:11:y:2014:i:3:p:204-212. 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.