Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business, general

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business, general

The magnitude of errors in proximal multiattribute decision analysis with probabilistically dependent attributes

Article Abstract:

Kirkwood's (1992) approximate analysis method is examined in terms of its accuracy in assessing alternatives under uncertainty with multiple evaluation characteristics. This approximation procedure is based on Howard's (1971) proximal approach and uses only the first two moments of the probability distributions for the alternatives. Because of this, the Kirkwood model has the potential to considerably reduce the amount of information needed to compare alternatives in the presence of probabilistic dependence among evaluation attributes. Findings show that the approximation method is accurate under certain conditions representative of numerous decision analysis applications. These conditions are discussed.

Author: Kirkwood, Craig W., Corner, James L.
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences
Publication Name: Management Science
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0025-1909
Year: 1996
Decision-making, Decision making, Analysis, Approximation theory, Approximation

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Estimating the impact of uncertainty on a deterministic multiattribute evaluation

Article Abstract:

A new procedure for approximating the effects of uncertainty on the results of a multiattribute evaluation is presented. The approximation procedure permits the consideration of the impact of uncertainty even without the completion of a full probabilistic multiattribute utility analysis. The approximation procedure is relatively simple and, in many cases, can be used with electronic spreadsheet programs. An illustrative application is also provided to test the procedure's accuracy.

Author: Kirkwood, Craig W.
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences
Publication Name: Management Science
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0025-1909
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Risk, return, skewness and preference

Article Abstract:

The assumption that a link exists between general moment preference and expected utility theory for risk-averse investors selecting from a choice of projects is examined and proven to be incorrect. The assumption, widely believed to be true for individual decision makers faced with a choice of projects occuring in a situation that allows arbitrary returns, is disproved theoretically using an analytical method derived from the Tchebychev system of functions.

Author: Brockett, Patrick L., Kahane, Yehuda
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences
Publication Name: Management Science
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0025-1909
Year: 1992

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Research, Decision theory, Utility theory, Utility functions
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: The lease vs. purchase decision. Managing risk with derivatives. Teaching activity-based costing
  • Abstracts: A modeling framework for coordinating promotion and production decisions within a firm. Reducing separable convex programs with tree constraints
  • Abstracts: Accounting classification and the predictive content of earnings. The effect of concern about reported income on discretionary spending decisions: the case of research and development
  • Abstracts: Developing classification structure of organizational problems: an empirical investigation. Solution diversity and the quality of group decisions
  • Abstracts: New on-line casinos may thwart U.S. laws. Value of PCs in education in still debated. 'Computerizing' dull meetings is touted as an antidote to the mouth that bored
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.