Abstract
Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA) is a decision support method that allows representing uncertain, imprecise, and partially missing criteria measurements and preference information as probability distributions. In this paper, we test how the assumed shape of the utility or value function affects the results of SMAA in two different problem settings: identifying the most preferred alternative and ranking all the alternatives. A linear value function has been most frequently applied, because more precise shape information can be difficult to obtain in real-life applications. In this paper, we analyse one past real-life problem and a large number of randomly generated test problems of different size using additive functions of different shape. The shape varies from linear to increasingly concave and convex exponential utility or value functions corresponding to different attitudes on marginal value or risk. The results indicate that in most cases slight non-linearity does not significantly affect the results. The proposed method can be used for evaluating how robust a particular real-life decision problem is with respect to the shape of the function. Based on this information, it is possible to determine how accurately the DMs’ preferences need to be assessed in a particular problem, and if it is possible to assume a simple linear shape.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beynon MJ, Wells P (2008) The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: a PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis. Omega 36(3): 384–394
Butler J, Jia J, Dyer J (1997) Simulation techniques for the sensitivity of multi-criteria decision models. Eur J Oper Res 103(3): 531–546
Durbach I (2009a) On the estimation of a satisficing model of choice using stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Omega 37(3): 497–509
Durbach I (2009b) The use of the SMAA acceptability index in descriptive decision analysis. Eur J Oper Res 196(3): 923–934
Durbach I, Stewart T (2009) Using expected values to simplify decision making under uncertainty. Omega 37(2): 312–330
Hokkanen J, Lahdelma R, Miettinen K, Salminen P (1998) Determining the implementation order of a general plan by using a multicriteria method. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 7(5): 273–284
Hokkanen J, Lahdelma R, Salminen P (1999) A multiple criteria decision model for analyzing and choosing among different development patterns for the Helsinki cargo harbour. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 33(1): 1–23
Jiménez A, Mateos A, Ríos-Insua S (2009) Missing consequences in multiattribute utility theory. Omega 37(2): 395–410
Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New York
Kendall M (1938) A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrika 30: 81–89
Kirkwood C (1992) Estimating the impact of uncertainty on deterministic multiattribute evaluation. Manage Sci 38(6): 819–826
Kirkwood C (2004) Approximating risk aversion in decision analysis applications. Decis Anal 1(1): 51–67
Lahdelma R, Hokkanen J, Salminen P (1998) SMAA—stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 106(1): 137–143
Lahdelma R, Makkonen S, Salminen P (2009) Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems. Omega 37(1): 79–92
Lahdelma R, Salminen P (2001) SMAA-2: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper Res 49(3): 444–454
Lahdelma R, Salminen P (2002) Pseudo-criteria versus linear utility function in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 141(2): 454–469
Lahdelma R, Salminen P, Hokkanen J (2000) Using multicriteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environ Manage 26(6): 595–605
Stewart T (1993) Use of piecewise linear value functions in interactive multicriteria decision support. Manage Sci 39(11): 1369–1381
Stewart T (1995) Simplified approaches for multicriteria decision making under uncertainty. J Multi- Criteria Decis Anal 4(4): 246–248
Stewart T (1996) Robustness of additive value function methods in MCDM. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 5(4): 301–309
Tervonen T, Figueira J (2008) A survey on stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis methods. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 15(1–2): 1–14
Tervonen T, Hakonen H, Lahdelma R (2008) Elevator planning using stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Omega 36(3): 352–362
Tervonen T, Lahdelma R (2007) Implementing stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 178(2): 500–513
von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lahdelma, R., Salminen, P. The shape of the utility or value function in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. OR Spectrum 34, 785–802 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-011-0244-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-011-0244-5