Logical Decisions - Classweb
Logical Decisions - Classweb Logical Decisions - Classweb
In Depth Introduction This section is a more detailed discussion of how you can use multi-objective decision analysis (MODA) to evaluate difficult real-life decisions. First, we will summarize the steps in the decision analysis approach. We then discuss each step in detail along with how to use Logical Decisions (LDW) to carry out the steps. LDW provides a sophisticated method for comparing and ranking alternatives. It lets you use the powerful tools of decision analysis to evaluate complicated alternatives involving uncertainties and seemingly incomparable characteristics. The more familiar you become with the principles of decision analysis and their use in LDW, the more insights you can gain into your decisions by using the software. Decision analysis was developed in the 1960s and 1970s at Stanford, MIT and other major universities (see Bibliography). It is generally considered a branch of the engineering discipline of Operations Research, but also has links to economics, mathematics and psychology. LDW makes it easy to use decision analysis for comparing alternatives. The essence of decision analysis is to break complicated decisions down into small pieces that you can deal with individually and then recombine logically. A key goal of decision analysis is to make a clear distinction between the choices that you can make (the alternatives), the characteristics of the alternatives (quantified by the measures) and the relative desirability of different sets of characteristics (preferences). These distinctions let you clearly separate the objective and subjective parts of your decision. The alternatives and the way they are described using the measures are relatively objective. Even if there are uncertainties in the levels of the measures, it is usually possible to come to an agreement about how to characterize them. Section 9 -- In Depth 9-1
- Page 195 and 196: simulation for each alternative usi
- Page 197 and 198: Sensitivity Graphs Sensitivity grap
- Page 199 and 200: You can view a sensitivity table by
- Page 201 and 202: Figure 8-28. Example of Results::Sc
- Page 203 and 204: Figure 8-30. Example of Results::Sc
- Page 205 and 206: In the dialog box, you are asked to
- Page 207 and 208: Figure 8-34. Dialog box for Results
- Page 209 and 210: Graph an Alternative The graph an a
- Page 211 and 212: Figure 8-38. Example of Results::Gr
- Page 213 and 214: Finally, the two radio buttons on t
- Page 215 and 216: Figure 8-43. Example of Results::Co
- Page 217 and 218: Printing and Saving Windows You can
- Page 219 and 220: The dialog box will show you the fi
- Page 221 and 222: Figure 8-45. Dialog box for Edit::C
- Page 223 and 224: Changing the range for utility. You
- Page 225 and 226: Figure 8-50. Dialog box for Prefere
- Page 227 and 228: the current color for that type of
- Page 229 and 230: copies the selected objects to the
- Page 231 and 232: analysis with the skeleton analysis
- Page 233 and 234: Figure 8-55. Dialog box for File::I
- Page 235 and 236: the other measures. The measure nam
- Page 237 and 238: The idea of the Import Structure op
- Page 239 and 240: Next, LDW asks you if it should app
- Page 241 and 242: Other Options utility function for
- Page 243: In addition, the Window menu contai
- Page 248 and 249: On the other hand, the weights of t
- Page 250 and 251: Identifying Alternatives Alternativ
- Page 252 and 253: Identifying and Defining Alternativ
- Page 254 and 255: of the hierarchy be made up of eval
- Page 256 and 257: The default is that measure levels
- Page 258 and 259: categories' sites. For example, the
- Page 260 and 261: objective measure levels and the mo
- Page 262 and 263: no intrinsically correct shape for
- Page 264 and 265: this truck B, and call the change f
- Page 266 and 267: Figure 9-4. SUF curve resulting fro
- Page 268 and 269: Figure 9-5 summarizes the process o
- Page 270 and 271: other measures, including cost, and
- Page 272 and 273: The second parameter, local risk av
- Page 274 and 275: Each cell in the matrix represents
- Page 276 and 277: always a complete set of utilities
- Page 278 and 279: The utility of an alternative on th
- Page 280 and 281: Different preference assessment met
- Page 282 and 283: similar but more complicated if the
- Page 284 and 285: The first member to be improved is
- Page 286 and 287: decision maker to state importance
- Page 288 and 289: It should be easier for a decision
- Page 290 and 291: Figure 9-8 shows how a tradeoff can
- Page 292 and 293: Figure 9-9. Example graph for trade
- Page 294 and 295: This dialogue let us establish a tr
In Depth<br />
Introduction<br />
This section is a more detailed discussion of how you can use<br />
multi-objective decision analysis (MODA) to evaluate difficult<br />
real-life decisions. First, we will summarize the steps in the<br />
decision analysis approach. We then discuss each step in detail<br />
along with how to use <strong>Logical</strong> <strong>Decisions</strong> (LDW) to carry out the<br />
steps.<br />
LDW provides a sophisticated method for comparing and ranking<br />
alternatives. It lets you use the powerful tools of decision<br />
analysis to evaluate complicated alternatives involving<br />
uncertainties and seemingly incomparable characteristics. The<br />
more familiar you become with the principles of decision analysis<br />
and their use in LDW, the more insights you can gain into your<br />
decisions by using the software.<br />
Decision analysis was developed in the 1960s and 1970s at<br />
Stanford, MIT and other major universities (see Bibliography). It<br />
is generally considered a branch of the engineering discipline of<br />
Operations Research, but also has links to economics,<br />
mathematics and psychology. LDW makes it easy to use decision<br />
analysis for comparing alternatives.<br />
The essence of decision analysis is to break complicated decisions<br />
down into small pieces that you can deal with individually and<br />
then recombine logically.<br />
A key goal of decision analysis is to make a clear distinction<br />
between the choices that you can make (the alternatives), the<br />
characteristics of the alternatives (quantified by the measures)<br />
and the relative desirability of different sets of characteristics<br />
(preferences). These distinctions let you clearly separate the<br />
objective and subjective parts of your decision.<br />
The alternatives and the way they are described using the<br />
measures are relatively objective. Even if there are uncertainties<br />
in the levels of the measures, it is usually possible to come to an<br />
agreement about how to characterize them.<br />
Section 9 -- In Depth 9-1