IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/oropre/v57y2009i5p1262-1270.html

Some searches may not work properly. We apologize for the inconvenience.

   My bibliography  Save this article

A Decision-Analytic Approach to Reliability-Based Design Optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Robert F. Bordley

    (General Motors Technical Center, Warren, Michigan 48090)

  • Stephen M. Pollock

    (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109)

Abstract

Reliability-based design optimization is concerned with designing a product to optimize an objective function, given uncertainties about whether various design constraints will be satisfied. However, the widespread practice of formulating such problems as chance-constrained programs can lead to misleading solutions. While a decision-analytic approach would avoid this undesirable result, many engineers find it difficult to determine the utility functions required for a traditional decision analysis. This paper presents an alternative decision-analytic formulation that, although implicitly using utility functions, is more closely related to probability maximization formulations with which engineers are comfortable and skilled. This result combines the rigor of decision analysis with the convenience of existing optimization approaches.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert F. Bordley & Stephen M. Pollock, 2009. "A Decision-Analytic Approach to Reliability-Based Design Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 1262-1270, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:oropre:v:57:y:2009:i:5:p:1262-1270
    DOI: 10.1287/opre.1080.0661
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.1080.0661
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/opre.1080.0661?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. Andrew J. Hogan & James G. Morris & Howard E. Thompson, 1981. "Decision Problems Under Risk and Chance Constrained Programming: Dilemmas in the Transition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 698-716, June.
    2. Erio Castagnoli & Marco LiCalzi, 2005. "Expected utility without utility," Game Theory and Information 0508004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Irving H. LaValle, 1987. "Note---Response to "Use of Sample Information in Stochastic Recourse and Chance-Constrained Programming Models": On the "Bayesability" of CCP's," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(10), pages 1224-1228, October.
    4. Robert Bordley & Marco LiCalzi, 2000. "Decision analysis using targets instead of utility functions," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 23(1), pages 53-74.
    5. Robert F. Bordley & Craig W. Kirkwood, 2004. "Multiattribute Preference Analysis with Performance Targets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 823-835, December.
    6. Bruce L. Miller & Harvey M. Wagner, 1965. "Chance Constrained Programming with Joint Constraints," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(6), pages 930-945, December.
    7. Fishburn, Peter C. & LaValle, Irving H., 1998. "Subjective expected lexicographic utility with infinite state sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 323-346, October.
    8. Robert P. Smith & Steven D. Eppinger, 1997. "Identifying Controlling Features of Engineering Design Iteration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(3), pages 276-293, March.
    9. Roger A. Blau, 1974. "Stochastic Programming and Decision Analysis: An Apparent Dilemma," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 271-276, November.
    10. R. Jagannathan, 1985. "Use of Sample Information in Stochastic Recourse and Chance-Constrained Programming Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 96-108, January.
    11. A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1963. "Deterministic Equivalents for Optimizing and Satisficing under Chance Constraints," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(1), pages 18-39, February.
    12. Robert F. Nau, 1987. "Note---Blau's Dilemma Revisited," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(10), pages 1232-1237, October.
    13. Peter C. Fishburn & Irving H. LaValle, 1998. "Subjective expected lexicographic utility:Axioms and assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 80(0), pages 183-206, January.
    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. Gomez, J. & Insua, D. Rios & Alfaro, C., 2016. "A participatory budget model under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 351-358.
    2. Chang, Victor & Liu, Ben S.C. & Sudharshan, D. & Xu, Qianwen Ariel, 2021. "Towards an effective negotiation modeling: Investigating transboundary disputes with cases of lower possibilities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    3. Matthias Schmidt & Alexander Lorenz & Hermann Held & Elmar Kriegler, 2011. "Climate targets under uncertainty: challenges and remedies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 783-791, February.
    4. Maddulapalli, Anil Kumar & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2012. "Estimation, modeling, and aggregation of missing survey data for prioritizing customer voices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 762-776.
    5. Shao-Wei Lam & Tsan Sheng Ng & Melvyn Sim & Jin-Hwa Song, 2013. "Multiple Objectives Satisficing Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 214-227, February.
    6. Bordley, Robert F. & Pollock, Stephen M., 2012. "Assigning resources and targets to an organization’s activities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 752-761.
    7. Grani A. Hanasusanto & Vladimir Roitch & Daniel Kuhn & Wolfram Wiesemann, 2017. "Ambiguous Joint Chance Constraints Under Mean and Dispersion Information," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 751-767, June.

    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. Bordley, Robert F. & Pollock, Stephen M., 2012. "Assigning resources and targets to an organization’s activities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(3), pages 752-761.
    2. Bordley, Robert F., 2005. "Econophysics and individual choice," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 354(C), pages 479-495.
    3. Shao-Wei Lam & Tsan Sheng Ng & Melvyn Sim & Jin-Hwa Song, 2013. "Multiple Objectives Satisficing Under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 214-227, February.
    4. Marek Hudik, 0. "Equilibrium as compatibility of plans," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    5. Wenqing Chen & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "Goal-Driven Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 342-357, April.
    6. Jeffrey M. Keisler & Robert F. Bordley, 2015. "Project Management Decisions with Uncertain Targets," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 15-28, March.
    7. Ilia Tsetlin & Robert L. Winkler, 2007. "Decision Making with Multiattribute Performance Targets: The Impact of Changes in Performance and Target Distributions," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 226-233, April.
    8. David B. Brown & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "Satisficing Measures for Analysis of Risky Positions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 71-84, January.
    9. Lixia H. Lambert & Eric A. DeVuyst & Burton C. English & Rodney Holcomb, 2021. "Analyzing the Trade-Offs between Meeting Biorefinery Production Capacity and Feedstock Supply Cost: A Chance Constrained Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-13, August.
    10. Lucy Gongtao Chen & Daniel Zhuoyu Long & Melvyn Sim, 2015. "On Dynamic Decision Making to Meet Consumption Targets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1117-1130, October.
    11. Matthias Schmidt & Alexander Lorenz & Hermann Held & Elmar Kriegler, 2011. "Climate targets under uncertainty: challenges and remedies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(3), pages 783-791, February.
    12. Bilsel, R. Ufuk & Ravindran, A., 2011. "A multiobjective chance constrained programming model for supplier selection under uncertainty," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1284-1300, September.
    13. Robert Bordley & Marco Licalzi & Luisa Tibiletti, 2017. "A Target-Based Foundation for the “Hard-Easy Effect” Bias," Eurasian Studies in Business and Economics, in: Mehmet Huseyin Bilgin & Hakan Danis & Ender Demir & Ugur Can (ed.), Country Experiences in Economic Development, Management and Entrepreneurship, pages 659-671, Springer.
    14. O. Olesen, 2006. "Comparing and Combining Two Approaches for Chance Constrained DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 103-119, October.
    15. Maji, Chandi Charan, 1975. "Intertemporal allocation of irrigation water in the Mayurakshi Project (India): an application of deterministic and chance-constrained linear programming," ISU General Staff Papers 197501010800006381, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Chernonog, Tatyana & Avinadav, Tal, 2014. "Profit criteria involving risk in price setting of virtual products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 236(1), pages 351-360.
    17. 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.
    18. Avinadav, Tal & Chernonog, Tatyana & Perlman, Yael, 2014. "Analysis of protection and pricing strategies for digital products under uncertain demand," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 54-64.
    19. Woo-Jin Jung & Seungjun Yang & Hee-Woong Kim, 2020. "Design of sweepstakes-based social media marketing for online customer engagement," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 119-146, March.
    20. Rashed Khanjani Shiraz & Madjid Tavana & Hirofumi Fukuyama, 2021. "A joint chance-constrained data envelopment analysis model with random output data," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 1255-1277, June.

    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:oropre:v:57:y:2009:i:5:p:1262-1270. 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.