IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v15y2018i3p139-153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Hurwicz Decision Rule’s Relationship to Decision Making with the Triangle and Beta Distributions and Exponential Utility

Author

Listed:
  • Sarat Sivaprasad

    (Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011)

  • Cameron A. MacKenzie

    (Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011)

Abstract

Nonprobabilistic approaches to decision making have been proposed for situations in which an individual does not have enough information to assess probabilities over an uncertainty. One nonprobabilistic method is to use intervals in which an uncertainty has a minimum and maximum but nothing is assumed about the relative likelihood of any value in the interval. The Hurwicz decision rule in which a parameter trades off between pessimism and optimism generalizes the current rules for making decisions with intervals. This article analyzes the relationship between intervals based on the Hurwicz rule and traditional decision analysis using a few probability distributions and an exponential utility function. This article shows that the Hurwicz decision rule for an interval is logically equivalent to (i) an expected value decision with a triangle distribution over the interval; (ii) an expected value decision with a beta distribution; and (iii) an expected utility decision with constant absolute risk aversion with a uniform distribution. These probability distributions are not exhaustive. There are likely other distributions and utility functions for which equivalence with the Hurwicz decision rule can also be established. Since a frequent reason for the use intervals is that intervals assume less information than a probability distribution, the results in this article call into question whether decision making based on intervals really assumes less information than subjective expected utility decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:15:y:2018:i:3:p:139-153
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.2018.0368
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2018.0368
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.2018.0368?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. Helton, Jon C. & Johnson, Jay D. & Sallaberry, Cédric J., 2011. "Quantification of margins and uncertainties: Example analyses from reactor safety and radioactive waste disposal involving the separation of aleatory and epistemic uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(9), pages 1014-1033.
    2. Helena Gaspars-Wieloch, 2014. "Modifications of the Hurwicz’s decision rule," 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. 22(4), pages 779-794, December.
    3. Ishibuchi, Hisao & Tanaka, Hideo, 1990. "Multiobjective programming in optimization of the interval objective function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 219-225, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Patrick L. Brockett & Linda L. Golden, 1987. "A Class of Utility Functions Containing all the Common Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(8), pages 955-964, August.
    6. D. Warner North, 2010. "Probability Theory and Consistent Reasoning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 377-380, March.
    7. Durga Rao, K. & Kushwaha, H.S. & Verma, A.K. & Srividya, A., 2007. "Quantification of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties in level-1 probabilistic safety assessment studies," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 92(7), pages 947-956.
    8. Aven, Terje & Zio, Enrico, 2011. "Some considerations on the treatment of uncertainties in risk assessment for practical decision making," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 64-74.
    9. Terje Aven, 2010. "On the Need for Restricting the Probabilistic Analysis in Risk Assessments to Variability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 354-360, March.
    10. Danielson, Mats & Ekenberg, Love, 2007. "Computing upper and lower bounds in interval decision trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(2), pages 808-816, September.
    11. Ronald A. Howard, 1988. "Uncertainty about Probability: A Decision Analysis Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 91-98, March.
    12. Didier Dubois, 2010. "Representation, Propagation, and Decision Issues in Risk Analysis Under Incomplete Probabilistic Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 361-368, March.
    13. Johnson, Eric J & Hershey, John & Meszaros, Jacqueline & Kunreuther, Howard, 1993. "Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 35-51, August.
    14. Zhang, Z. & Jiang, C. & Wang, G.G. & Han, X., 2015. "First and second order approximate reliability analysis methods using evidence theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 40-49.
    15. Xiaoyan Su & Sankaran Mahadevan & Peida Xu & Yong Deng, 2015. "Dependence Assessment in Human Reliability Analysis Using Evidence Theory and AHP," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1296-1316, July.
    16. Terje Aven, 2010. "Reply to Discussants on “The Need for Restricting the Probabilistic Analysis in Risk Assessments to Variability”," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 381-384, March.
    17. Chanas, Stefan & Kuchta, Dorota, 1996. "Multiobjective programming in optimization of interval objective functions -- A generalized approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 594-598, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Shah, Harsheel & Hosder, Serhat & Winter, Tyler, 2015. "Quantification of margins and mixed uncertainties using evidence theory and stochastic expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 59-72.
    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. Vicki M. Bier & Simon French, 2020. "From the Editors: Decision Analysis Focus and Trends," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 1-8, March.

    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. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A critical discussion and practical recommendations on some issues relevant to the non-probabilistic treatment of uncertainty in engineering risk assessment," Post-Print hal-01652230, HAL.
    2. D. Warner North, 2011. "Uncertainties, Precaution, and Science: Focus on the State of Knowledge and How It May Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1526-1529, October.
    3. Yu, Xuchao & Liang, Wei & Zhang, Laibin & Reniers, Genserik & Lu, Linlin, 2018. "Risk assessment of the maintenance process for onshore oil and gas transmission pipelines under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 50-67.
    4. Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Alberto Pasanisi & Mathieu Couplet, 2017. "A Critical Discussion and Practical Recommendations on Some Issues Relevant to the Nonprobabilistic Treatment of Uncertainty in Engineering Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(7), pages 1315-1340, July.
    5. Anil Markandya & Enrica Cian & Laurent Drouet & Josué M. Polanco-Martínez & Francesco Bosello, 2019. "Building Risk into the Mitigation/Adaptation Decisions simulated by Integrated Assessment Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(4), pages 1687-1721, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    8. Zio, E., 2018. "The future of risk assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 176-190.
    9. Jiang, C. & Han, X. & Liu, G.R. & Liu, G.P., 2008. "A nonlinear interval number programming method for uncertain optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 1-13, July.
    10. William A. Huber, 2010. "Ignorance Is Not Probability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 371-376, March.
    11. Terje Aven, 2012. "Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1647-1656, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Deyun Zhou & Yongchuan Tang & Wen Jiang, 2017. "An Improved Belief Entropy and Its Application in Decision-Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-15, March.
    14. Mrinal Jana & Geetanjali Panda, 2018. "$$\chi$$ χ -Optimal solution of single objective nonlinear optimization problem with uncertain parameters," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(1), pages 165-186, March.
    15. Shengwen Yin & Keliang Jin & Yu Bai & Wei Zhou & Zhonggang Wang, 2023. "Solution-Space-Reduction-Based Evidence Theory Method for Stiffness Evaluation of Air Springs with Epistemic Uncertainty," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Pasanisi, Alberto & Keller, Merlin & Parent, Eric, 2012. "Estimation of a quantity of interest in uncertainty analysis: Some help from Bayesian decision theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-101.
    17. Tu Duong Le Duy & Laurence Dieulle & Dominique Vasseur & Christophe Bérenguer & Mathieu Couplet, 2013. "An alternative comprehensive framework using belief functions for parameter and model uncertainty analysis in nuclear probabilistic risk assessment applications," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 227(5), pages 471-490, October.
    18. Wu, Hsien-Chung, 2009. "The Karush-Kuhn-Tucker optimality conditions in multiobjective programming problems with interval-valued objective functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(1), pages 49-60, July.
    19. Mi, Jinhua & Li, Yan-Feng & Peng, Weiwen & Huang, Hong-Zhong, 2018. "Reliability analysis of complex multi-state system with common cause failure based on evidential networks," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 71-81.
    20. Didier Dubois, 2010. "Representation, Propagation, and Decision Issues in Risk Analysis Under Incomplete Probabilistic Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 361-368, 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:inm:ordeca:v:15:y:2018:i:3:p:139-153. 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.