Efficiency of influence diagram models with continuous decision variables

A measure of efficiency for influence diagram models with continuous decision variables is presented in order to evaluate whether the additional computational complexity required by a more accurate model is justified. The efficiency measure is a multi-objective utility function that considers both the accuracy and complexity of the ID model. Accuracy is determined as the mean squared error between influence diagram decision rules and an analytical solution. Complexity is assessed by tracking the run time required to obtain the solution. The resulting efficiency score considers the preferences of an individual decision maker for accuracy and complexity. Three influence diagram models are compared using the efficiency measurement, and an iterative solution procedure is introduced to improve model performance.

[1]  R. L. Winkler,et al.  Statistics : Probability, Inference and Decision , 1975 .

[2]  Serafín Moral,et al.  Mixtures of Truncated Exponentials in Hybrid Bayesian Networks , 2001, ECSQARU.

[3]  Steffen L. Lauritzen,et al.  Representing and Solving Decision Problems with Limited Information , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[4]  Joel Brynielsson,et al.  Using AI and games for decision support in command and control , 2007, Decis. Support Syst..

[5]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  Approximating probability density functions in hybrid Bayesian networks with mixtures of truncated exponentials , 2006, Stat. Comput..

[6]  D. J. Hand,et al.  Artificial Intelligence Frontiers in Statistics: AI and Statistics III , 1992 .

[7]  Ross D. Shachter,et al.  Mixtures of Gaussians and Minimum Relative Entropy Techniques for Modeling Continuous Uncertainties , 1993, UAI.

[8]  Antonie Stam,et al.  On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP , 2003, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis , 1989 .

[10]  Michael R. Baye,et al.  Managerial economics and business strategy , 1999 .

[11]  Scott M. Olmsted.  On representing and solving decision problems , 1983 .

[12]  Anders L. Madsen,et al.  Solving linear-quadratic conditional Gaussian influence diagrams , 2005, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[13]  Ross D. Shachter.  Evaluating Influence Diagrams , 1986, Oper. Res..

[14]  Hans W. Gottinger,et al.  Intelligent inference systems based on influence diagrams , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[15]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  A new method for representing and solving Bayesian decision problems , 1993 .

[16]  F. Lootsma.  SCALE SENSITIVITY IN THE MULTIPLICATIVE AHP AND SMART , 1993 .

[17]  Stephen Wolfram,et al.  The Mathematica Book , 1996 .

[18]  Robert F. Göx.  Capacity Planning and Pricing under Uncertainty , 2000 .

[19]  Barry R. Cobb,et al.  Influence Diagrams with Continuous Decision Variables and Non-Gaussian Uncertainties , 2007, Decis. Anal..

[20]  Concha Bielza,et al.  Explaining clinical decisions by extracting regularity patterns , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[21]  Anders L Madsen,et al.  Solving CLQG Influence Diagrams Using Arc-Reversal Operations in a Strong Junction Tree , 2008 .

[22]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  Inference in hybrid Bayesian networks with mixtures of truncated exponentials , 2006, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[23]  Andrés Cano,et al.  A forward-backward Monte Carlo method for solving influence diagrams , 2006, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[24]  Hans W. Gottinger,et al.  Intelligent decision support systems , 1992, Decis. Support Syst..

[25]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[26]  C. Robert Kenley,et al.  Gaussian influence diagrams , 1989 .

[27]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[28]  Qiang Ji,et al.  Strategy Selection in Influence Diagrams using Imprecise Probabilities , 2008, UAI.

[29]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  Decision making with hybrid influence diagrams using mixtures of truncated exponentials , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[30]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Influence Diagrams , 2005, Decis. Anal..

[31]  J. Barzilai,et al.  Consistent weights for judgements matrices of the relative importance of alternatives , 1987 .

[32]  Andrew P. Sage,et al.  Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.