IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/75025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Wulf, David
  • Bertsch, Valentin

Abstract

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) enables decision makers (DM) and decision analysts (DA) to analyse and understand decision situations in a structured and formalised way. With the increasing complexity of decision support systems (DSSs), it becomes challenging for both expert and novice users to understand and interpret the model results. Natural language generation (NLG) techniques are used in various DSSs to cope with this challenge as they reduce the cognitive effort to achieve understanding of decision situations. However, NLG techniques in MCDA have so far mainly been developed for deterministic decision situations or one-dimensional sensitivity analyses. In this paper, a concept for the generation of textual explanations for a multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in MCDA is developed. The key contribution is a NLG approach that provides detailed explanations of the implications of preferential uncertainties in Multi-Attribute Value Theory (MAVT). It generates a report that assesses the influences of simultaneous or separate variations of inter-criteria and intra-criteria preferential parameters determined within the decision analysis. We explore the added value of the natural language report in an online survey. Our results show that the NLG approach is particularly beneficial for difficult interpretational tasks.

Suggested Citation

  • Wulf, David & Bertsch, Valentin, 2016. "A natural language generation approach to support understanding and traceability of multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis in multi-criteria decision making," MPRA Paper 75025, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:75025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/75025/1/MPRA_paper_75025.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mateos, A. & Jimenez, A. & Rios-Insua, S., 2006. "Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1842-1864, November.
    2. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans, 1994. "PROMCALC & GAIA: a new decision support system for multicriteria decision aid," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9349, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Paul D Ellis, 2010. "Effect sizes and the interpretation of research results in international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 41(9), pages 1581-1588, December.
    4. Streimikiene, Dalia & Balezentis, Tomas & Krisciukaitienė, Irena & Balezentis, Alvydas, 2012. "Prioritizing sustainable electricity production technologies: MCDM approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 3302-3311.
    5. Wang, Jiang-Jiang & Jing, You-Yin & Zhang, Chun-Fa & Zhao, Jun-Hong, 2009. "Review on multi-criteria decision analysis aid in sustainable energy decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(9), pages 2263-2278, December.
    6. Geldermann, Jutta & Bertsch, Valentin & Treitz, Martin & French, Simon & Papamichail, Konstantinia N. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2009. "Multi-criteria decision support and evaluation of strategies for nuclear remediation management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 238-251, February.
    7. Kowalski, Katharina & Stagl, Sigrid & Madlener, Reinhard & Omann, Ines, 2009. "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(3), pages 1063-1074, September.
    8. Lahdelma, Risto & Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1998. "SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 137-143, April.
    9. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    10. Hauke Jan & Kossowski Tomasz, 2011. "Comparison of Values of Pearson's and Spearman's Correlation Coefficients on the Same Sets of Data," Quaestiones Geographicae, De Gruyter Open, vol. 30(2), pages 87-93, June.
    11. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    12. Stewart, TJ, 1992. "A critical survey on the status of multiple criteria decision making theory and practice," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 569-586.
    13. Ribeiro, Fernando & Ferreira, Paula & Araújo, Madalena, 2013. "Evaluating future scenarios for the power generation sector using a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) tool: The Portuguese case," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 126-136.
    14. Jessop, Alan, 2014. "IMP: A decision aid for multiattribute evaluation using imprecise weight estimates," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 18-29.
    15. Browne, David & O'Regan, Bernadette & Moles, Richard, 2010. "Use of multi-criteria decision analysis to explore alternative domestic energy and electricity policy scenarios in an Irish city-region," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 518-528.
    16. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2006. "Decision analysis in energy and environmental modeling: An update," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(14), pages 2604-2622.
    17. Bell, Michelle L. & Hobbs, Benjamin F. & Ellis, Hugh, 2003. "The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in the integrated assessment of climate change: implications for IA practitioners," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 289-316, December.
    18. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    19. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2009. "Using expected values to simplify decision making under uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 312-330, April.
    20. Butler, John & Jia, Jianmin & Dyer, James, 1997. "Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 531-546, December.
    21. Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Alaja, Susanna, 2008. "The threat of weighting biases in environmental decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 556-569, December.
    22. Scholten, Lisa & Schuwirth, Nele & Reichert, Peter & Lienert, Judit, 2015. "Tackling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis – An application to water supply infrastructure planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 243-260.
    23. Graves, Samuel B. & Ringuest, Jeffrey L., 2009. "Probabilistic dominance criteria for comparing uncertain alternatives: A tutorial," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 346-357, April.
    24. Scott, James A. & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K., 2012. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for bioenergy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 146-156.
    25. Mareschal, Bertrand & Brans, Jean-Pierre, 1988. "Geometrical representations for MCDA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 69-77, February.
    26. Heo, Eunnyeong & Kim, Jinsoo & Boo, Kyung-Jin, 2010. "Analysis of the assessment factors for renewable energy dissemination program evaluation using fuzzy AHP," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(8), pages 2214-2220, October.
    27. Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
    28. Greening, Lorna A. & Bernow, Steve, 2004. "Design of coordinated energy and environmental policies: use of multi-criteria decision-making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 721-735, April.
    29. Henk Broekhuizen & Catharina Groothuis-Oudshoorn & Janine Til & J. Hummel & Maarten IJzerman, 2015. "A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 445-455, May.
    30. Insua, David Rios & French, Simon, 1991. "A framework for sensitivity analysis in discrete multi-objective decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 176-190, September.
    31. Løken, Espen, 2007. "Use of multicriteria decision analysis methods for energy planning problems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 11(7), pages 1584-1595, September.
    32. Hodgkin, Julie & Belton, Valerie & Koulouri, Anastasia, 2005. "Supporting the intelligent MCDA user: A case study in multi-person multi-criteria decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 172-189, January.
    33. Pohekar, S. D. & Ramachandran, M., 2004. "Application of multi-criteria decision making to sustainable energy planning--A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 365-381, August.
    34. Matsatsinis, Nikolaos F. & Samaras, Andreas P., 2001. "MCDA and preference disaggregation in group decision support systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 414-429, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Decision support systems; Multiple criteria analysis; Preferential uncertainty modelling; Natural language generation; Multi-dimensional preferential sensitivity analysis;

    JEL classification:

    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • Q48 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:75025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.