Supporting Negotiations over Influence Diagrams

Rios, Jesus; Insua, David Rios
September 2009
Decision Analysis;Sep2009, Vol. 6 Issue 3, p153
Academic Journal
We deal with issues concerning negotiation support for group decisions over influence diagrams, when the group members disagree about utility and probability assessments. We base our discussion on a modification of the balanced increment solution, which guarantees a final negotiated Pareto optimal alternative. As in standard decision analysis textbooks, we deal first with negotiation tables, then with negotiation trees, and finally with negotiation influence diagrams. We show through an example that a naive application of the balanced increment method at each joint decision node in a dynamic decision-making problem, and, more generally, of any standard negotiation approach guaranteeing Pareto optimality, may lead to an inferior solution. Therefore, our strategy proposes computing first the set of nondominated alternatives followed by negotiating over that set.


Related Articles

  • From the Guest Editor�: Special Issue on Graph-Based Representations. Horvitz, Eric // Decision Analysis;Sep2005, Vol. 2 Issue 3, p125 

    Graphical representations have played a central role in decision analysis. Although decision trees remain popular, more general graphical languages can be used to encode relationships among variables of a decision basis. Influence diagrams, introduced in the late 1970s, provide a general...

  • Influence Diagrams. Howard, Ronald A.; Matheson, James E. // Decision Analysis;Sep2005, Vol. 2 Issue 3, p127 

    The article focuses on the probabilistic use of influence diagrams. Influence diagram is at once both a formal description of the problem that can be treated by computers and a representation easily understood by people in all walks of life and degrees of technical proficiency. Because of its...

  • Influence Diagram Retrospective. Howard, Ronald A.; Matheson, James E. // Decision Analysis;Sep2005, Vol. 2 Issue 3, p144 

    Since the invention of Influence diagrams in the mid-1970s, they have become a ubiquitous tool for representing uncertain situations. This single diagram replaced awkward manipulations of decision trees and nature's trees with a single representation that displays both the sequential and...

  • Newborn Management: Decision Trees and Management Problems.  // Clinical Pediatrics;May1979, Vol. 18 Issue 5, p319 

    This article presents information on the booklet "Newborn Management: Decision Trees and Management Problems," by Carmi Z. Margolis and Donald L. Shapiro. The student first studies in the book a decision flow chart on one of the eight common clinical situations. Using a special pen, he then...

  • A Comparison of Graphical Techniques for Asymmetric Decision Problems. Bielza, Concha; Shenoy, Prakash P. // Management Science;Nov99, Vol. 45 Issue 11, p1552 

    We compare four graphical techniques for representation and solution of asymmetric decision problems--decision trees, influence diagrams, valuation networks, and sequential decision diagrams. We solve a modified version of Covaliu and Oliver's Reactor problem using each of the four techniques....

  • Structuring conditional relationships in influence diagrams. Smith, James E.; Holtzman, Samuel; Matheson, James E. // Operations Research;Mar/Apr93, Vol. 41 Issue 2, p280 

    An influence diagram is a graphical representation of a decision problem that is at once a formal description of a decision problem that can be treated by computers and a representation that is easily understood by decision makers who may be unskilled in the art of complex probabilistic...

  • An experimental study of the efficiency of unanimity rule and majority rule. Dougherty, Keith; Pitts, Brian; Moeller, Justin; Ragan, Robi // Public Choice;Mar2014, Vol. 158 Issue 3/4, p359 

    Scholars traditionally claim that unanimity rule is more capable of producing Pareto optimal outcomes than majority rule. Dougherty and Edward (Public Choice 151(3):655-678, ) make the opposite claim assuming proposals are either random, sincere, or strategic. We test these competing hypotheses...

  • A new preference handling technique for interactive multiobjective optimization without trading-off. Miettinen, Kaisa; Podkopaev, Dmitry; Ruiz, Francisco; Luque, Mariano // Journal of Global Optimization;Dec2015, Vol. 63 Issue 4, p633 

    Because the purpose of multiobjective optimization methods is to optimize conflicting objectives simultaneously, they mainly focus on Pareto optimal solutions, where improvement with respect to some objective is only possible by allowing some other objective(s) to impair. Bringing this idea into...

  • A group decision classifier with particle swarm optimization and decision tree for analyzing achievements in mathematics and science. Pai, Ping-Feng; Chen, Chen-Tung; Hung, Yu-Mei; Hung, Wei-Zhan; Chang, Ying-Chieh // Neural Computing & Applications;Dec2014, Vol. 25 Issue 7/8, p2011 

    Group decision making is a multi-criteria decision-making method applied in many fields. However, the use of group decision-making techniques in multi-class classification problems and rule generation is not explored widely. This investigation developed a group decision classifier with particle...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics