Skip to main content

Robustness as a Criterion for Selecting a Probability Distribution Under Uncertainty

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robustness in Econometrics

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 692))

  • 1668 Accesses

Abstract

Often, we only have partial knowledge about a probability distribution, and we would like to select a single probability distribution \(\rho (x)\) out of all probability distributions which are consistent with the available knowledge. One way to make this selection is to take into account that usually, the values x of the corresponding quantity are also known only with some accuracy. It is therefore desirable to select a distribution which is the most robust—in the sense the x-inaccuracy leads to the smallest possible inaccuracy in the resulting probabilities. In this paper, we describe the corresponding most robust probability distributions, and we show that the use of resulting probability distributions has an additional advantage: it makes related computations easier and faster.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Azzalini A, Capitanio A (2013) The Skew-Normal and Related Families. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Fishburn PC (1969) Utility Theory for Decision Making. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Jaynes ET, Bretthorst GL (2003) Probability theory: the logic of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Klir G, Yuan B (1995) Fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Kreinovich V, Kosheleva O, Nguyen HT, Sriboonchitta S (2016) Why some families of probability distributions are practically efficient: a symmetry-based explanation. In: Huynh VN, Kreinovich V, Sriboonchitta S (eds) Causal inference in econometrics. Springer, Cham, pp 133–152

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Luce RD, Raiffa R (1989) Games and decisions: introduction and critical survey. Dover, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen HT, Kosheleva O, Kreinovich V (2009) Decision making beyond Arrow’s ‘impossibility theorem’, with the analysis of effects of collusion and mutual attraction. Int J Intell Syst 24(1):27–47

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Nguyen HT, Kreinovich V, Lea B, Tolbert D (1992) How to control if even experts are not sure: robust fuzzy control. In: Proceedings of the second international workshop on industrial applications of fuzzy control and intelligent systems, College Station, Texas, 2–4 December 1992, pp 153–162

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nguyen HT, Kreinovich V, Tolbert D (1993) On robustness of fuzzy logics. In: Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems FUZZ-IEEE’93, San Francisco, California, March 1993, vol 1, pp 543–547

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nguyen HT, Kreinovich V, Tolbert D (1994) A measure of average sensitivity for fuzzy logics. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 2(4):361–375

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Nguyen HT, Walker EA (2006) A first course in fuzzy logic. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Novitskii PV, Zograph IA (1991) Estimating the measurement errors. Energoatomizdat, Leningrad (in Russian)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rabinovich SG (2005) Measurement errors and uncertainty. Theory and practice. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Raiffa H (1970) Decision analysis. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Sheskin DJ (2011) Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, Florida

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the partial support of the Center of Excellence in Econometrics, Faculty of Economics, Chiang Mai University, Thailand. This work was also supported in part by the National Science Foundation grants HRD-0734825 and HRD-1242122 (Cyber-ShARE Center of Excellence) and DUE-0926721, and by an award “UTEP and Prudential Actuarial Science Academy and Pipeline Initiative” from Prudential Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Songsak Sriboonchitta .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sriboonchitta, S., Nguyen, H.T., Kreinovich, V., Kosheleva, O. (2017). Robustness as a Criterion for Selecting a Probability Distribution Under Uncertainty. In: Kreinovich, V., Sriboonchitta, S., Huynh, VN. (eds) Robustness in Econometrics. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 692. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50742-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50742-2_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50741-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50742-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics