Robust Design of Networks Under Risks

  • Y. Ermoliev
  • A. GaivoronskiEmail author
  • M. Makowski
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 633)


Study of network risks allows to develop insights into the methods of building robust networks, which are also critical elements of infrastructures that are of a paramount importance for the modern society. In this paper we show how the modern quantitative modeling methodologies can be employed for analysis of network risks and for design of robust networks under uncertainty. The approach is illustrated by an important problem arising in the process of building the information infrastructure for the advanced mobile data services.

We show how the portfolio theory developed in the modern finance can be used for design of robust provision network. Next, the modeling frameworks of Bayesian nets and Markov fields are used for the study of several problems fundamental for the process of service adoption such as the sensitivity of networks, the direction of improvements, and the propagation of participants’ attitudes on social networks.


Bayesian Network Service Composition Efficient Frontier Content Provider Risk Tolerance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Parts of this work has benefited from the support of the IST project IST-2005-027617 SPICE (partly funded by the European Union), and of the COST Action 293 Graphs and algorithms in communication networks (GRAAL). The authors are grateful to Dr. Josip Zoric of Telenor for useful discussions and help in formulating Example 6.1.

Alexei Gaivoronski acknowledges the hospitality of the Integrated Modeling Environment Project, and the IIASA creative environment.

The authors are grateful to two anonymous referees who contributed with their comments to the improvement of the paper.


  1. 1.
    Audestad, J.-A., Gaivoronski, A.A., Werner, A.: Extending the stochastic programming framework for the modeling of several decision makers: pricing and competition in the telecommunication sector. Ann. Oper. Res. 142, 19–39 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birge, J.R., Louveaux, F.: Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    BIS: Amendment to the capital accord to incorporate market risks. Bank for International Settlements (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bishop, C.M.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Colson, B., Marcotte, P., Savard, G.: Bilevel programming: A survey. 4OR 3(2), 87–107 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dempe, S.: Foundations of Bilevel Programming. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ermoliev, Y.M.: Methods of Stochastic Programming. Nauka, Moscow (1976)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ermoliev, Y.M.: Stochastic quasigradient methods: general theory. In: Encyclopedia of Optimization. Kluwer, Boston (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ermoliev, Y.M., Gaivoronski, A.A.: Stochastic quasigraient methods. SIAM/OPT Views-and-News (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ermoliev, Y.M., Wets, R.J.-B. (eds.): Numerical Techniques for Stochastic Optimization. Springer, Berlin (1988)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Faber, E., Ballon, P., Bouwman, H., Haaker, T., Rietkerk, O., Steen, M.: Designing business models for mobile ICT services. In: Proceedings of 16th Bled E-Commerce Conference, Bled, Slovenia, June 2003Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gaivoronski, A.A.: SQG: stochastic programming software environment. In: Wallace, S.W., Ziemba, W.T. (eds.) Applications of Stochastic Programming. SIAM & MPS, Philadelphia (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gaivoronski, A.: Stochastic optimization in telecommunications. In: Resende, M.G.C., Pardalos, P.M. (eds.) Handbook of Optimization in Telecommunications, chap. 27, pp. 761–799. Springer, Berlin (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaivoronski, A.A., Pflug, G.: Value-at-risk in portfolio optimization: properties and computational approach. J. Risk 7(2), 1–31 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gaivoronski, A.A., Stella, F.: Stochastic optimization with structured distributions: the case of Bayesian Nets. Ann. Oper. Res. 81, 189–211 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geman, S., Geman, D.: Stochastic relaxation, gibbs distributions, and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 6, 721–741 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Glynn, P.W., Iglehart, D.L.: Importance sampling for stochastic simulations. Manage. Sci. 35(11), 1367–1392 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Granat, J., Makowski, M.: Interactive specification and analysis of aspiration-based preferences. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 122(2), 469–485 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Haaker, T., Kijl, B., Galli, L., Killström, U., Immonen, O., de Reuver, M.: Challenges in designing viable business models for context-aware mobile services. In: CICT Conference Papers, Copenaghen, 2006Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kall, P., Wallace, S.: Stochastic Programming. Wiley, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Luenberger, D.: Investment Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Makowski, M.: Management of attainable tradeoffs between conflicting goals. J. Comput. 4, 1033–1042 (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Makowski, M., Wierzbicki, A.: Modeling knowledge: model-based decision support and soft computations. In: Yu, X., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) Applied Decision Support with Soft Computing. Springer, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Markowitz, H.: Portfolio Selection, 2nd edn. Blackwell, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Patriksson, M., Wynter, L.: Stochastic mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. Oper. Res. Lett. 25(4), 159–167 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rockafellar, R.T., Ursayev, S.: Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. J. Risk 2(3), 21–41 (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rubinstein, R.Y.: Sensitivity analysis and performance extrapolation for computer simulation models. Oper. Res. 37, 72–81 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scholtes, S., Stöhr, M.: Exact penalization of mathematical programs with equilibrium constraints. SIAM J. Control Optim. 37, 617–652 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Trigeorgis, L.: Real Options: Managerial Flexibility and Strategy in Resource Allocation. MIT, Cambridge, MA (1996)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wierzbicki, A., Makowski, M., Wessels, J. (eds.): Model-Based Decision Support Methodology with Environmental Applications. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial Economics and Technology ManagementNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.International Institute for Applied Systems AnalysisLaxenburgAustria

Personalised recommendations