IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v315y2022i2d10.1007_s10479-020-03843-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-based scenario clustering for decision-making under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Hewitt

    (Loyola University)

  • Janosch Ortmann

    (Université du Québec à Montréal (UQÀM)
    Centre de recherches mathématiques, Université de Montréal)

  • Walter Rei

    (Université du Québec à Montréal (UQÀM)
    Université de Montréal)

Abstract

In order to make sense of future uncertainty, managers have long resorted to creating scenarios that are then used to evaluate how uncertainty affects decision-making. The large number of scenarios that are required to faithfully represent several sources of uncertainty leads to major computational challenges in using these scenarios in a decision-support context. Moreover, the complexity induced by the large number of scenarios can stop decision makers from reasoning about the interplay between the uncertainty modelled by the data and the decision-making processes (i.e., how uncertainty affects the decisions to be made). To meet this challenge, we propose a new approach to group scenarios based on the decisions associated to them. We introduce a graph structure on the scenarios based on the opportunity cost of predicting the wrong scenario by the decision maker. This allows us to apply graph clustering methods and to obtain groups of scenarios with mutually acceptable decisions (i.e., decisions that remain efficient for all scenarios within the group). In the present paper, we test our approach by applying it in the context of stochastic optimization. Specifically, we use it as a means to derive both lower and upper bounds for stochastic network design models and fleet planning problems under uncertainty. Our numerical results indicate that our approach is particularly effective to derive high-quality bounds when dealing with complex problems under time limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Hewitt & Janosch Ortmann & Walter Rei, 2022. "Decision-based scenario clustering for decision-making under uncertainty," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(2), pages 747-771, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:315:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03843-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-020-03843-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-020-03843-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-020-03843-x?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    2. Nick Bloom & Stephen Bond & John Van Reenen, 2007. "Uncertainty and Investment Dynamics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(2), pages 391-415.
    3. Tietje, Olaf, 2005. "Identification of a small reliable and efficient set of consistent scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(2), pages 418-432, April.
    4. Borgonovo, E. & Cappelli, V. & Maccheroni, F. & Marinacci, M., 2018. "Risk analysis and decision theory: A bridge," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(1), pages 280-293.
    5. Ouyang, Yanfeng & Li, Xiaopeng, 2010. "The bullwhip effect in supply chain networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 799-810, March.
    6. van Groenendaal, W.J.H. & Kleijnen, J.P.C., 1997. "On the assessment of economic risk : Factorial design versus Monte Carlo methods," Other publications TiSEM fd2a2307-0812-4543-8151-7, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Arnt-Gunnar Lium & Teodor Gabriel Crainic & Stein W. Wallace, 2009. "A Study of Demand Stochasticity in Service Network Design," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 144-157, May.
    8. van Groenendaal, Willem J. H., 1998. "Estimating NPV variability for deterministic models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 202-213, May.
    9. Van Groenendaal, Willem J. H. & Kleijnen, Jack P. C., 2002. "Deterministic versus stochastic sensitivity analysis in investment problems: An environmental case study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 8-20, August.
    10. E. Borgonovo & L. Peccati, 2011. "Managerial insights from service industry models: a new scenario decomposition method," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 161-179, May.
    11. Julia L. Higle & Suvrajeet Sen, 1991. "Stochastic Decomposition: An Algorithm for Two-Stage Linear Programs with Recourse," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 650-669, August.
    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. Goerigk, Marc & Khosravi, Mohammad, 2023. "Optimal scenario reduction for one- and two-stage robust optimization with discrete uncertainty in the objective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(2), pages 529-551.

    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. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Plischke, Elmar, 2016. "Sensitivity analysis: A review of recent advances," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(3), pages 869-887.
    2. Borgonovo, E. & Gatti, S. & Peccati, L., 2010. "What drives value creation in investment projects? An application of sensitivity analysis to project finance transactions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(1), pages 227-236, August.
    3. Van Groenendaal, Willem J. H. & Kleijnen, Jack P. C., 2002. "Deterministic versus stochastic sensitivity analysis in investment problems: An environmental case study," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 8-20, August.
    4. Borgonovo, E. & Peccati, L., 2011. "Finite change comparative statics for risk-coherent inventories," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 52-62, May.
    5. Rabitti, Giovanni & Borgonovo, Emanuele, 2020. "Is mortality or interest rate the most important risk in annuity models? A comparison of sensitivity analysis methods," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 48-58.
    6. Yoichiro Fujii & Yusuke Osaki, 2018. "Regret-sensitive treatment decisions," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.
    7. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. Georgia Perakis & Guillaume Roels, 2008. "Regret in the Newsvendor Model with Partial Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 188-203, February.
    9. M. Jenabi & S. M. T. Fatemi Ghomi & S. A. Torabi & Moeen Sammak Jalali, 2022. "An accelerated Benders decomposition algorithm for stochastic power system expansion planning using sample average approximation," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 59(4), pages 1304-1336, December.
    10. Chan, Yue-Cheong & Saffar, Walid & Wei, K.C. John, 2021. "How economic policy uncertainty affects the cost of raising equity capital: Evidence from seasoned equity offerings," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    11. Ahmed, M. Iqbal & Cassou, Steven P., 2021. "Asymmetries in the effects of unemployment expectation shocks as monetary policy shifts with economic conditions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    12. Amos Schurr & Yaakov Kareev & Judith Avrahami & Ilana Ritov, 2012. "Taking the Broad Perspective: Risky Choices in Repeated Proficiency Tasks," Discussion Paper Series dp621, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    13. Jinyi Hu, 2023. "Linguistic Multiple-Attribute Decision Making Based on Regret Theory and Minimax-DEA," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-14, October.
    14. Li, Xiao-Ming, 2017. "New evidence on economic policy uncertainty and equity premium," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 46(PA), pages 41-56.
    15. Kyle Jurado & Sydney C. Ludvigson & Serena Ng, 2015. "Measuring Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(3), pages 1177-1216, March.
    16. Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2017. "How regret moves individual and collective choices towards rationality," Chapters, in: Morris Altman (ed.), Handbook of Behavioural Economics and Smart Decision-Making, chapter 11, pages 188-204, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Martín Egozcue & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2015. "Optimal output for the regret-averse competitive firm under price uncertainty," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 5(2), pages 279-295, December.
    18. Colson, Gérard, 1993. "Prenons-nous assez de risque dans les théories du risque?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 69(1), pages 111-141, mars.
    19. Liu, Hui-hui & Song, Yao-yao & Liu, Xiao-xiao & Yang, Guo-liang, 2020. "Aggregating the DEA prospect cross-efficiency with an application to state key laboratories in China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    20. Z. Jun Lin & Shengqiang Liu & Fangcheng Sun, 2017. "The Impact of Financing Constraints and Agency Costs on Corporate R&D Investment: Evidence from China," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 3-42, March.

    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:spr:annopr:v:315:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s10479-020-03843-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.