Robust ordinal regression for value functions handling interacting criteria

International audienceWe present a new method called UTAGMS–INT for ranking a finite set of alternatives evaluated on multiple criteria. It belongs to the family of Robust Ordinal Regression (ROR) methods which build a set of preference models compatible with preference information elicited by the Decision Maker (DM). The preference model used by UTAGMS–INT is a general additive value function augmented by two types of components corresponding to ‘‘bonus’’ or ‘‘penalty’’ values for positively or negatively interacting pairs of criteria, respectively. When calculating value of a particular alternative, a bonus is added to the additive component of the value function if a given pair of criteria is in a positive synergy for performances of this alternative on the two criteria. Similarly, a penalty is subtracted from the additive component of the value function if a given pair of criteria is in a negative synergy for performances of the considered alternative on the two criteria. The preference information elicited by the DM is composed of pairwise comparisons of some reference alternatives, as well as of comparisons of some pairs of reference alternatives with respect to intensity of preference, either comprehensively or on a particular criterion. In UTAGMS–INT, ROR starts with identification of pairs of interacting criteria for given preference information by solving a mixed-integer linear program. Once the interacting pairs are validated by the DM, ROR continues calculations with the whole set of compatible value functions handling the interacting criteria, to get necessary and possible preference relations in the considered set of alternatives. A single representative value function can be calculated to attribute specific scores to alternatives. It also gives values to bonuses and penalties. UTAGMS–INT handles quite general interactions among criteria and provides an interesting alternative to the Choquet integral

Dominance-based rough set approach and analytic network process for assessing urban transformation scenarios

For half a century, the significant development of intensive farming has led to a massive use of products such as pesticides. The excessive use of these substances has contaminated surface water and groundwater. Drinking water extraction points have also had to be abandoned. Some thirty years ago, in the southwest of France, a group of farmers decided to improve their farming methods, as well as developing new Best Environmental Practices, such as grass strips along streams and riparian forests. By combining the use of ELECTRE TRI-C multi-criteria model with a GIS, we were able to characterise the contribution of each farming area to the risk of surface water contamination with pesticides. We also assessed the effectiveness of different environmental practices. We found that the use of Best Environmental Practices led to a reduction in the risk of pesticides transfer. This methodology re-enforces decision support tools for water resource managers and agricultural and environmental stakeholders

Incorporating stakeholders’ knowledge in group decision-making

International audienc

Robust decision analysis under severe uncertainty and ambiguous tradeoffs: an invasive species case study

Bayesian decision analysis is a useful method for risk management decisions, but is limited in its ability to consider severe uncertainty in knowledge, and value ambiguity in management objectives. We study the use of robust Bayesian decision analysis to handle problems where one or both of these issues arise. The robust Bayesian approach models severe uncertainty through bounds on probability distributions, and value ambiguity through bounds on utility functions. To incorporate data, standard Bayesian updating is applied on the entire set of distributions. To elicit our expert's utility representing the value of different management objectives, we use a modified version of the swing weighting procedure that can cope with severe value ambiguity. We demonstrate these methods on an environmental management problem to eradicate an alien invasive marmorkrebs recently discovered in Sweden, which needed a rapid response despite substantial knowledge gaps if the species was still present (i.e., severe uncertainty) and the need for difficult tradeoffs and competing interests (i.e., value ambiguity). We identify that the decision alternatives to drain the system and remove individuals in combination with dredging and sieving with or without a degradable biocide, or increasing pH, are consistently bad under the entire range of probability and utility bounds. This case study shows how robust Bayesian decision analysis provides a transparent methodology for integrating information in risk management problems where little data are available and/or where the tradeoffs are ambiguous