A Fuzzy Approach to Risk Based Decision Making

  • Omar Khadeer Hussain
  • Elizabeth Chang
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
  • Tharam S. Dillon
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4278)


Decision making is a tough process. It involves dealing with a lot of uncertainty and projecting what the final outcome might be. Depending on the projection of the uncertain outcome, a decision has to be taken. In a peer-to-peer financial interaction, the trusting agent in order to analyze the Risk has to consider the possible likelihood of failure of the interaction and the possible consequences of failure to its resources involved in the interaction before concluding whether to interact with the probable trusted agent or not. Further it might also have to choose and decide on an agent to interact with from a set of probable trusted agents. In this paper we propose a Fuzzy Risk based decision making system that would assist the trusting agent to ease its decision making process.


Membership Function Fuzzy System Fuzzy Variable Fuzzy Logic System Fuzzy Approach 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cooper, D.F.: The Australian and New Zealand Standard on Risk Management, AS/NZS 4360:2004, Tutorial Notes: Broadleaf Capital International Pty Ltd. (2004), Available: http://www.broadleaf.com.au/tutorials/Tut_Standard.pdf
  2. 2.
    March, G.J., Shapira, Z.: Managerial perspective on risk and risk taking. Management Science 33(11), 1404–1418 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Luhmann, N.: Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives, Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Basil Blackwell, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An interactive model for organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20(3), 709–734Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., Camerer, C.: Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23(3), 391–404Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sztompka, P.: Trust: A sociological theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grazioli, S., Wang, A.: Looking without seeing: Understanding unsophisticated consumers success and failure to detect Internet deception. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans, USA, pp. 193–204 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cheung, C., Lee, M.K.O.: Trust in Internet shopping: A proposed model and measurement instrument. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Americas Conference on Information Systems, Long Beach, CA, pp. 681–689 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hussain, O.K., Chang, E., Hussain, F.K., Dillon, T.S.: A Methodology for Risk Based Decision Making in a Service Oriented Environment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing, Taichung, Taiwan, vol. 1, pp. 506–513 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carter, J., Ghorbani, A.A.: Towards a formalization of value-centric trust in agent societies. Web Intelligence and Agent Systems 2(3), 167–183 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greenland, S.: Bounding analysis as an inadequately specified methodology. Risk Analysis 24(5), 1085–1092 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Omar Khadeer Hussain
    • 1
  • Elizabeth Chang
    • 1
  • Farookh Khadeer Hussain
    • 1
  • Tharam S. Dillon
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Information SystemsCurtin University of TechnologyPerthAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Information TechnologyUniversity of TechnologySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations