Considering the Info-Gap Approach to Robust Decisions Under Severe Uncertainty in the Context of Environmentally Benign Design

Information-Gap Decision Theory (IGDT), an approach to robust decision making under severe uncertainty, is considered in the context of a simple life cycle engineering example. IGDT offers a path to a decision in the class of problems where only a nominal estimate is available for some uncertain life cycle variable that affects performance, and where there is some unknown amount of discrepancy between that estimate and the variable’s actual value. Instead of seeking maximized performance, the decision rule inherent to IGDT prefers designs with maximum immunity (info-gap robustness) to the size that the unknown discrepancy could take. This robustness aspiration is subject to a constraint of achieving better than some minimal requirement for performance. In this paper, an automotive oil filter selection design example, which involves several types of severe uncertainty, is formulated and solved using an IDGT approach. Particular attention is paid to the complexities of assessing preference for robustness to multiple severe uncertainties simultaneously. The strengths and limitations of the approach are discussed mainly in the context of environmentally benign design and manufacture.Copyright © 2006 by ASME

[1]  Jason Matthew Aughenbaugh,et al.  APPLYING INFORMATION ECONOMICS AND IMPRECISE PROBABILITIES TO DATA COLLECTION IN DESIGN , 2005 .

[2]  I. Elishakoff,et al.  Convex models of uncertainty in applied mechanics , 1990 .

[3]  A. Sudjianto,et al.  Reliability-Based Design With the Mixture of Random and Interval Variables , 2005, DAC 2003.

[4]  Robert L. Mullen,et al.  Interval Methods for Reliable Computing , 2004 .

[5]  François M. Hemez,et al.  Info-gap robustness for the correlation of tests and simulations of a non-linear transient , 2004 .

[6]  Y. Ben-Haim Set-models of information-gap uncertainty: axioms and an inference scheme , 1999 .

[7]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Perspectives in life cycle impact assessment , 1998 .

[8]  Izuru Takewaki,et al.  Info-gap robust design with load and model uncertainties , 2005 .

[9]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Decision analysis: practice and promise , 1988 .

[10]  Lesley F. Wright,et al.  Information Gap Decision Theory: Decisions under Severe Uncertainty , 2004 .

[11]  P. Walley Statistical Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities , 1990 .

[12]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Probability bounds analysis , 1998 .

[13]  Christiaan J. J. Paredis,et al.  A Comparison of Probability Bounds Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis in Environmentally Benign Design and Manufacture , 2006, DAC 2006.

[14]  Yakov Ben-Haim,et al.  Robust rationality and decisions under severe uncertainty , 2000, J. Frankl. Inst..

[15]  Keith W. Hipel,et al.  Decision making in an uncertain world: information-gap modeling in water resources management , 1999, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C.

[16]  Yakov Ben-Haim,et al.  Uncertainty, probability and information-gaps , 2004, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[17]  Anna Björklund,et al.  Survey of approaches to improve reliability in lca , 2002 .

[18]  Robert T. Clemen,et al.  Making Hard Decisions: An Introduction to Decision Analysis , 1997 .

[19]  P. Gu,et al.  Systematic Life Cycle Design for Sustainable Product Development , 2003 .

[20]  David Evans,et al.  How LCA studies deal with uncertainty , 2002 .

[21]  Jim W. Hall,et al.  Convex Analysis of Flood Inundation Model Uncertainties and Info-Gap Flood Management Decisions , 2005 .

[22]  C. Paredis,et al.  The Value of Using Imprecise Probabilities in Engineering Design , 2006 .

[23]  M. Goedkoop,et al.  The Eco-indicator 99, A damage oriented method for Life Cycle Impact Assessment , 1999 .

[24]  B. W. Vigon,et al.  Life-cycle assessment : inventory guidelines and principles , 1994 .

[25]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  ROBUST DECISION‐MAKING UNDER SEVERE UNCERTAINTY FOR CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT , 2005 .

[26]  J. Berger Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis , 1988 .