INFM 718A / LBSC 705 Information For Decision Making

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
5/30/2014 Aosta, May 24th 2012 SESAMO: a decision support system for the Multi Criteria Analysis Fiorella GRASSO, Stefano MARAN (PP3) Project Final Meeting.
Advertisements

BU Decision Models Integer_LP1 Integer Optimization Summer 2013.
Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT)
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy Chapter 4 The Theory of Individual Behavior.
1 Decision Making and Utility Introduction –The expected value criterion may not be appropriate if the decision is a one-time opportunity with substantial.
1 DSCI 3223 Decision Analysis Decision Making Under Uncertainty –Techniques play an important role in business, government, everyday life, college football.
Multiobjective Value Analysis.  A procedure for ranking alternatives and selecting the most preferred  Appropriate for multiple conflicting objectives.
Engineering Systems Analysis Richard de Neufville © Massachusetts Institute of Technology Economic Evaluation Slide 1 of 22 Economic Evaluation l Objective.
Consumer Decision Making II
Copyright © 2006 Pearson Education Canada Inc Course Arrangement !!! Nov. 22,Tuesday Last Class Nov. 23,WednesdayQuiz 5 Nov. 25, FridayTutorial 5.
Project Selection and Needs Identification updated: 8/30/2010.
Mutli-Attribute Decision Making Scott Matthews Courses: /
Identifying "Good" Architectural Design Alternatives with Multi-Objective Optimization Strategies By Lars Grunske Presented by Robert Dannels.
INFM 718A / LBSC 705 Information For Decision Making Lecture 4.
Quick Reminder of the Theory of Consumer Choice Professor Roberto Chang Rutgers University January 2007.
INFM 718A / LBSC 705 Information For Decision Making Lecture 1.
SUPPORTING BUSINESS DECISIONS A Case Study: Multi-Criteria Decision Modelling.
Option Basics - Part II. Call Values When Future Stock Prices Are Certain to Be Above the Exercise Price Suppose the value of a stock one year from today.
INFM 718A / LBSC 705 Information For Decision Making Lecture 11.
Assigning Metrics for Optimization. Evaluation Measures Each evaluation measure (EM) is a category by which an option is ranked/graded –Example: A car.
Design Optimization School of Engineering University of Bradford 1 Formulation of a multi-objective problem Pareto optimum set consists of the designs.
Engineering Systems Analysis Richard de Neufville © Massachusetts Institute of Technology Economic Evaluation Slide 1 of 22 Economic Evaluation l Objective.
The Marriage Problem Finding an Optimal Stopping Procedure.

Lecture # 2 Review Go over Homework Sets #1 & #2 Consumer Behavior APPLIED ECONOMICS FOR BUSINESS MANAGEMENT.
6.1 Chapter 7 – The Theory of Consumer Behavior  The Theory of Consumer behavior provides the theoretical basis for buyer decision- making and the foundation.
The Theory of Consumer Choice
Higher Derivatives Concavity 2 nd Derivative Test Lesson 5.3.
Engineering Fundamentals Decision Matrix Spreadsheet Tutorial 1.
USING PREFERENCE CONSTRAINTS TO SOLVE MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING PROBLEMS Tanja Magoč, Martine Ceberio, and François Modave Computer Science Department,
Introduction to Decision Making Theory Dr. Nawaz Khan Lecture 1.
SAWPA OWOW 2.0 PROJECT RANKING PROCESS December 6, 2012.
Lecture 3: Consumer BehaviorSlide 1 Topics to be Discussed Consumer Preferences Budget Constraints Consumer Choice.
Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. 14 Elements of Nonparametric Statistics.
Chapter Four Present Value. Copyright © Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.4 | 2 Would you rather have $100 today or $105 in one year? What.
Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Objectives:  Use the utility-maximizing model to explain how consumers choose goods and services.  Use the concept of utility to explain how the law.
Chapter 3 Consumer Behavior. Chapter 3: Consumer BehaviorSlide 2 Topics to be Discussed Consumer Preferences Budget Constraints Consumer Choice Marginal.
Chapter 3 Consumer Behavior. Chapter 3: Consumer BehaviorSlide 2 Topics to be Discussed Consumer Preferences Budget Constraints Consumer Choice Revealed.
1 The “Perfect” Date Prepared for SSAC by Semra Kilic-Bahi - Colby-Sawyer College, New London, NH © The Washington Center for Improving the Quality of.
Demand: The Benefit Side of the Market. 2 Law of Demand  Law of Demand  People do less of what they want to do as the cost of doing it rises  Recall.
1 Chapter 4 UTILITY MAXIMIZATION AND CHOICE Copyright ©2005 by South-Western, a division of Thomson Learning. All rights reserved.
Chapter 5 ELEMENTS OF DEMAND AND CONSUMER CHOICE.
INFORMATION X INFO425: Systems Design Systems Design Project Deliverable 1.
Linear Systems of Equations Section 3.1. What is a “system” of equations?
Linear Judgment Models: What Do They Suggest About Human Judgment?
Date: 2011/1/11 Advisor: Dr. Koh. Jia-Ling Speaker: Lin, Yi-Jhen Mr. KNN: Soft Relevance for Multi-label Classification (CIKM’10) 1.
Applied Mathematics 1 Applications of the Multi-Weighted Scoring Model and the Analytical Hierarchy Process for the Appraisal and Evaluation of Suppliers.
LineUp: Visual Analysis of Multi- Attribute Rankings Samuel Gratzl, Alexander Lex, Nils Gehlenborg, Hanspeter Pfister, and Marc Streit.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2008 Chapter 5 Consumer choice and demand decisions David Begg, Stanley Fischer and Rudiger Dornbusch, Economics, 9th Edition,
Multi-Attribute Decision Making MADM Many decisions involve consideration of multiple attributes Another term: multiple criteria Examples: –Purchasing.
Alternative Designs  Why?  Whole or portion?  Expand the solutions.
Evolutionary Computing Chapter 12. / 26 Chapter 12: Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms Multiobjective optimisation problems (MOP) -Pareto optimality.
Section VI Capital Rationing. Section Highlights F Capital rationing F Linear programming F Shadow prices and the cost of capital F Integer programming.
DADSS Multiattribute Utility Theory. Administrative Details Homework Assignment 6 is due Monday. (slightly shorter) Homework Assignment 7 posted tonight.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2008 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter 4 Decision Analysis Building the Structure for Solving.
CHAPTER 11 and appendix RELEVANT COSTS With LINEAR PROGRAMMING.
Analysis Manager Training Module
Culture and Group decision Making exercise
Improvement Selection:
Business Economics (ECO 341) Fall Semester, 2012
Decision Matrices Business Economics.
Economic Evaluation Objective of Analysis Criteria Nature
Economic Evaluation Objective of Analysis Criteria Nature
Situation Analysis.
Attitudes and Attributes
Selecting a Solution Path
Decision Making Template.
Choose the best soltution Design Process Presentation Name Course Name
Multi-Attribute Decision Making MADM
Presentation transcript:

INFM 718A / LBSC 705 Information For Decision Making Lecture 10

Outline Multi-attribute Utility (MAU) models In-class MAU exercise Preview of Assignment 6

“Soft” Decision Methods Some decision situations can not be addressed with the “hard” decision techniques we worked on so far. We approach such decision situations using “softer” techniques, which provide margin for subjective judgments.

Multi-attribute Utility (MAU) Models Furthermore, some decisions involve more than criterion. There are both hard and soft methods that address multi-objective decision problems. Multi-attribute Utility Model approach is at the intersection of “soft” and “multi-objective” decision making.

MAU-type Decision Situations The decision depends on more than one criterion. You cannot just optimize a single criterion, and get a “solution.” Some or all criteria are “soft,” or subjective. (There can be objective criteria, as well.) Criteria may have different importance levels, or weights.

An Example Situation Buying a car. Three options: Yugo, Hyundai, Mercury Three criteria: Price, reliability, safety Criteria have different weights.

MAU Procedure You are trying to add apples and oranges. Assign scores (some are already given objectively.) Assign weights Normalize weights Normalize scores Calculate overall scores, and rank options

Normalizing Weights The total of the normalized (adjusted) weights should be 1.

Normalizing Scores “Good” criteria (“the higher the better”) “Bad” criteria (“the lower the better”)

Adjusting Weights Relative weight of a criterion depends mainly on two things: How important the criteria is for the decision, How different the best and the worst choices based on that criterion. If the difference based on that criterion between the best and worst choice is not big, the relative weight should be lower, even when the criterion is important.

Sensitivity Analysis What if the scores or weights were different? Would the ranking, or the relative “strengths” of the options be different? What amount of change in scores or weights would yield a different decision?

Sensitivity Analysis Change the score and weight values one by one, or in combinations to see what happens. An exhaustive coverage of all possible cases may be impractical. However, some pattern, and valuable insights emerge relatively quickly.

Let’s Work on the Car Example Price Reliability Safety Yugo $ 6,000 Hyundai $ 8,600 10 4 Mercury $ 10,000 6 Price Reliability Safety Weights 20 25 15