Dominance Measuring Method Performance under Incomplete Information about Weights.

In multi-attribute utility theory, it is often not easy to elicit precise values for the scaling weights representing the relative importance of criteria. A very widespread approach is to gather incomplete information. A recent approach for dealing with such situations is to use information about each alternative?s intensity of dominance, known as dominance measuring methods. Different dominancemeasuring methods have been proposed, and simulation studies have been carried out to compare these methods with each other and with other approaches but only when ordinal information about weights is available. In this paper, we useMonte Carlo simulation techniques to analyse the performance of and adapt such methods to deal with weight intervals, weights fitting independent normal probability distributions orweights represented by fuzzy numbers.Moreover, dominance measuringmethod performance is also compared with a widely used methodology dealing with incomplete information on weights, the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA). SMAA is based on exploring the weight space to describe the evaluations that would make each alternative the preferred one.

Dominance intensity measure within fuzzy weight oriented MAUT: an application

We introduce a dominance intensity measuring method to derive a ranking of alternatives to deal with incomplete information in multi-criteria decision-making problems on the basis of multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT) and fuzzy sets theory. We consider the situation where there is imprecision concerning decision-makers’ preferences, and imprecise weights are represented by trapezoidal fuzzy weights.The proposed method is based on the dominance values between pairs of alternatives. These values can be computed by linear programming, as an additive multi-attribute utility model is used to rate the alternatives. Dominance values are then transformed into dominance intensity measures, used to rank the alternatives under consideration. Distances between fuzzy numbers based on the generalization of the left and right fuzzy numbers are utilized to account for fuzzy weights. An example concerning the selection of intervention strategies to restore an aquatic ecosystem contaminated by radionuclides illustrates the approach. Monte Carlo simulation techniques have been used to show that the proposed method performs well for different imprecision levels in terms of a hit ratio and a rank-order correlation measure.

Dominance measuring methods within MAVT/MAUT with imprecise information concerning decision-makers'preferences

Dominance measuring methods are an approach for dealing with complex decision-making problems with imprecise information within multi-attribute value/utility theory. These methods are based on the computation of pairwise dominance values and exploit the information in the dominance matrix in different ways to derive measures of dominance intensity and rank the alternatives under consideration. In this paper we review dominance measuring methods proposed in the literature for dealing with imprecise information (intervals, ordinal information or fuzzy numbers) about decision-makers? preferences and their performance in comparison with other existing approaches, like SMAA and SMAA-II or Sarabando and Dias? method.

Veto values in Group Decision Making within MAUT: aggregating complete rankings derived from dominance intensity measures

We consider a groupdecision-making problem within multi-attribute utility theory, in which the relative importance of decisionmakers (DMs) is known and their preferences are represented by means of an additive function. We allow DMs to provide veto values for the attribute under consideration and build veto and adjust functions that are incorporated into the additive model. Veto functions check whether alternative performances are within the respective veto intervals, making the overall utility of the alternative equal to 0, where as adjust functions reduce the utilty of the alternative performance to match the preferences of other DMs. Dominance measuring methods are used to account for imprecise information in the decision-making scenario and to derive a ranking of alternatives for each DM. Specifically, ordinal information about the relative importance of criteria is provided by each DM. Finally, an extension of Kemeny's method is used to aggregate the alternative rankings from the DMs accounting for the irrelative importance.

Toma de decisiones en grupo con información parcial y veto basada en medidas de la intensidad de dominancia

En la mayoría de problemas de decisión a los que nos enfrentamos no hay evidencia sobre cuál es la mejor elección debido a la complejidad de los mismos. Esta complejidad está asociada a la existencia de múltiples objetivos conflictivos y a que en muchos casos solo se dispone de información incompleta o imprecisa sobre los distintos parámetros del modelo de decisión. Por otro lado, el proceso de toma de decisiones se puede realizar en grupo, debiendo incorporar al modelo las preferencias individuales de cada uno de los decisores y, posteriormente, agregarlas para alcanzar un consenso final, lo que dificulta más todavía el proceso de decisión. La metodología del Análisis de Decisiones (AD) es un procedimiento sistemático y lógico que permite estructurar y simplificar la tarea de tomar decisiones. Utiliza la información existente, datos recogidos, modelos y opiniones profesionales para cuantificar la probabilidad de los valores o impactos de las alternativas y la Teoría de la Utilidad para cuantificar las preferencias de los decisores sobre los posibles valores de las alternativas. Esta tesis doctoral se centra en el desarrollo de extensiones del modelo multicriterio en utilidad aditivo para toma de decisiones en grupo con veto en base al AD y al concepto de la intensidad de la dominancia, que permite explotar la información incompleta o imprecisa asociada a los parámetros del modelo. Se considera la posibilidad de que la importancia relativa que tienen los criterios del problema para los decisores se representa mediante intervalos de valores o información ordinal o mediante números borrosos trapezoidales. Adicionalmente, se considera que los decisores tienen derecho a veto sobre los valores de los criterios bajo consideración, pero solo un subconjunto de ellos es efectivo, teniéndose el resto solo en cuenta de manera parcial. ABSTRACT In most decision-making problems, the best choice is unclear because of their complexity. This complexity is mainly associated with the existence of multiple conflicting objectives. Besides, there is, in many cases, only incomplete or inaccurate information on the various decision model parameters. Alternatively, the decision-making process may be performed by a group. Consequently, the model must account for individual preferences for each decision-maker (DM), which have to be aggregated to reach a final consensus. This makes the decision process even more difficult. The decision analysis (DA) methodology is a systematic and logical procedure for structuring and simplifying the decision-making task. It takes advantage of existing information, collected data, models and professional opinions to quantify the probability of the alternative values or impacts and utility theory to quantify the DM’s preferences concerning the possible alternative values. This PhD. thesis focuses on developing extensions for a multicriteria additive utility model for group decision-making accounting for vetoes based on DA and on the concept of dominance intensity in order to exploit incomplete or imprecise information associated with the parameters of the decision-making model. We consider the possibility of the relative importance of criteria for DMs being represented by intervals or ordinal information, or by trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Additionally, we consider that DMs are allowed to provide veto values for the criteria under consideration, of which only a subset are effective, whereas the remainder are only partially taken into account.

Some past decision theory models for euro construction model codes and for road drainage in Spain, and modest hints with multi-criteria methods for agro and environmental assurance

The authors are from UPM and are relatively grouped, and all have intervened in different academic or real cases on the subject, at different times as being of different age. With precedent from E. Torroja and A. Páez in Madrid Spain Safety Probabilistic models for concrete about 1957, now in ICOSSAR conferences, author J.M. Antón involved since autumn 1967 for euro-steel construction in CECM produced a math model for independent load superposition reductions, and using it a load coefficient pattern for codes in Rome Feb. 1969, practically adopted for European constructions, giving in JCSS Lisbon Feb. 1974 suggestion of union for concrete-steel-al.. That model uses model for loads like Gumbel type I, for 50 years for one type of load, reduced to 1 year to be added to other independent loads, the sum set in Gumbel theories to 50 years return period, there are parallel models. A complete reliability system was produced, including non linear effects as from buckling, phenomena considered somehow in actual Construction Eurocodes produced from Model Codes. The system was considered by author in CEB in presence of Hydraulic effects from rivers, floods, sea, in reference with actual practice. When redacting a Road Drainage Norm in MOPU Spain an optimization model was realized by authors giving a way to determine the figure of Return Period, 10 to 50 years, for the cases of hydraulic flows to be considered in road drainage. Satisfactory examples were a stream in SE of Spain with Gumbel Type I model and a paper of Ven Te Chow with Mississippi in Keokuk using Gumbel type II, and the model can be modernized with more varied extreme laws. In fact in the MOPU drainage norm the redacting commission acted also as expert to set a table of return periods for elements of road drainage, in fact as a multi-criteria complex decision system. These precedent ideas were used e.g. in wide Codes, indicated in symposia or meetings, but not published in journals in English, and a condensate of contributions of authors is presented. The authors are somehow involved in optimization for hydraulic and agro planning, and give modest hints of intended applications in presence of agro and environment planning as a selection of the criteria and utility functions involved in bayesian, multi-criteria or mixed decision systems. Modest consideration is made of changing in climate, and on the production and commercial systems, and on others as social and financial.

Assessing urban mobility through participatory scenario building and combined utility-regret assessment

La planificación de la movilidad sostenible urbana es una tarea compleja que implica un alto grado de incertidumbre debido al horizonte de planificación a largo plazo, la amplia gama de paquetes de políticas posibles, la necesidad de una aplicación efectiva y eficiente, la gran escala geográfica, la necesidad de considerar objetivos económicos, sociales y ambientales, y la respuesta del viajero a los diferentes cursos de acción y su aceptabilidad política (Shiftan et al., 2003). Además, con las tendencias inevitables en motorización y urbanización, la demanda de terrenos y recursos de movilidad en las ciudades está aumentando dramáticamente. Como consecuencia de ello, los problemas de congestión de tráfico, deterioro ambiental, contaminación del aire, consumo de energía, desigualdades en la comunidad, etc. se hacen más y más críticos para la sociedad. Esta situación no es estable a largo plazo. Para enfrentarse a estos desafíos y conseguir un desarrollo sostenible, es necesario considerar una estrategia de planificación urbana a largo plazo, que aborde las necesarias implicaciones potencialmente importantes. Esta tesis contribuye a las herramientas de evaluación a largo plazo de la movilidad urbana estableciendo una metodología innovadora para el análisis y optimización de dos tipos de medidas de gestión de la demanda del transporte (TDM). La metodología nueva realizado se basa en la flexibilización de la toma de decisiones basadas en utilidad, integrando diversos mecanismos de decisión contrariedad‐anticipada y combinados utilidad‐contrariedad en un marco integral de planificación del transporte. La metodología propuesta incluye dos aspectos principales: 1) La construcción de escenarios con una o varias medidas TDM usando el método de encuesta que incorpora la teoría “regret”. La construcción de escenarios para este trabajo se hace para considerar específicamente la implementación de cada medida TDM en el marco temporal y marco espacial. Al final, se construyen 13 escenarios TDM en términos del más deseable, el más posible y el de menor grado de “regret” como resultado de una encuesta en dos rondas a expertos en el tema. 2) A continuación se procede al desarrollo de un marco de evaluación estratégica, basado en un Análisis Multicriterio de Toma de Decisiones (Multicriteria Decision Analysis, MCDA) y en un modelo “regret”. Este marco de evaluación se utiliza para comparar la contribución de los distintos escenarios TDM a la movilidad sostenible y para determinar el mejor escenario utilizando no sólo el valor objetivo de utilidad objetivo obtenido en el análisis orientado a utilidad MCDA, sino también el valor de “regret” que se calcula por medio del modelo “regret” MCDA. La función objetivo del MCDA se integra en un modelo de interacción de uso del suelo y transporte que se usa para optimizar y evaluar los impactos a largo plazo de los escenarios TDM previamente construidos. Un modelo de “regret”, llamado “referencedependent regret model (RDRM)” (modelo de contrariedad dependiente de referencias), se ha adaptado para analizar la contribución de cada escenario TDM desde un punto de vista subjetivo. La validación de la metodología se realiza mediante su aplicación a un caso de estudio en la provincia de Madrid. La metodología propuesta define pues un procedimiento técnico detallado para la evaluación de los impactos estratégicos de la aplicación de medidas de gestión de la demanda en el transporte, que se considera que constituye una herramienta de planificación útil, transparente y flexible, tanto para los planificadores como para los responsables de la gestión del transporte. Planning sustainable urban mobility is a complex task involving a high degree of uncertainty due to the long‐term planning horizon, the wide spectrum of potential policy packages, the need for effective and efficient implementation, the large geographical scale, the necessity to consider economic, social, and environmental goals, and the traveller’s response to the various action courses and their political acceptability (Shiftan et al., 2003). Moreover, with the inevitable trends on motorisation and urbanisation, the demand for land and mobility in cities is growing dramatically. Consequently, the problems of traffic congestion, environmental deterioration, air pollution, energy consumption, and community inequity etc., are becoming more and more critical for the society (EU, 2011). Certainly, this course is not sustainable in the long term. To address this challenge and achieve sustainable development, a long‐term perspective strategic urban plan, with its potentially important implications, should be established. This thesis contributes on assessing long‐term urban mobility by establishing an innovative methodology for optimizing and evaluating two types of transport demand management measures (TDM). The new methodology aims at relaxing the utility‐based decision‐making assumption by embedding anticipated‐regret and combined utilityregret decision mechanisms in an integrated transport planning framework. The proposed methodology includes two major aspects: 1) Construction of policy scenarios within a single measure or combined TDM policy‐packages using the survey method incorporating the regret theory. The purpose of building the TDM scenarios in this work is to address the specific implementation in terms of time frame and geographic scale for each TDM measure. Finally, 13 TDM scenarios are built in terms of the most desirable, the most expected and the least regret choice by means of the two‐round Delphi based survey. 2) Development of the combined utility‐regret analysis framework based on multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). This assessment framework is used to compare the contribution of the TDM scenario towards sustainable mobility and to determine the best scenario considering not only the objective utility value obtained from the utilitybased MCDA, but also a regret value that is calculated via a regret‐based MCDA. The objective function of the utility‐based MCDA is integrated in a land use and transport interaction model and is used for optimizing and assessing the long term impacts of the constructed TDM scenarios. A regret based model, called referente dependent regret model (RDRM) is adapted to analyse the contribution of each TDM scenario in terms of a subjective point of view. The suggested methodology is implemented and validated in the case of Madrid. It defines a comprehensive technical procedure for assessing strategic effects of transport demand management measures, which can be useful, transparent and flexible planning tool both for planners and decision‐makers.