未知专家使用不精确的狄利克雷模型提供判断的概率

L. Utkin
{"title":"未知专家使用不精确的狄利克雷模型提供判断的概率","authors":"L. Utkin","doi":"10.1080/14664530490896672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most models of aggregating expert judgments assume that there is available some information characterizing the experts. This information may be incorporated into the so-called hierarchical uncertainty models (second-order models). However, we often do not know anything about experts or it is difficult to evaluate their quality. In this case, beliefs to experts may be in the interval [0, 1] and the resulting assessments become to be non-informative. Moreover, attempts to assign some weights or beliefs to experts were not crowned with success because the behavior of experts may be distinguished in different circumstances. Therefore, this paper proposes to estimate expert judgm ents instead of experts themselves and studies how to assign interval probabilities of expert judgments by using a set of multinomial models.","PeriodicalId":212131,"journal":{"name":"Risk Decision and Policy","volume":"134 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Probabilities of judgments provided by unknown experts by using the imprecise Dirichlet model\",\"authors\":\"L. Utkin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14664530490896672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most models of aggregating expert judgments assume that there is available some information characterizing the experts. This information may be incorporated into the so-called hierarchical uncertainty models (second-order models). However, we often do not know anything about experts or it is difficult to evaluate their quality. In this case, beliefs to experts may be in the interval [0, 1] and the resulting assessments become to be non-informative. Moreover, attempts to assign some weights or beliefs to experts were not crowned with success because the behavior of experts may be distinguished in different circumstances. Therefore, this paper proposes to estimate expert judgm ents instead of experts themselves and studies how to assign interval probabilities of expert judgments by using a set of multinomial models.\",\"PeriodicalId\":212131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risk Decision and Policy\",\"volume\":\"134 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risk Decision and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664530490896672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Decision and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14664530490896672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

大多数汇总专家判断的模型都假定存在一些描述专家特征的可用信息。这些信息可以合并到所谓的层次不确定性模型(二阶模型)中。然而,我们往往对专家一无所知,或者很难评价他们的素质。在这种情况下,对专家的信念可能在[0,1]区间内,由此产生的评估变得无信息。此外,给专家分配一些权重或信念的尝试并没有取得成功,因为专家的行为可能在不同的情况下有所区别。因此,本文提出对专家判断进行估计而不是对专家本身进行估计,并研究了如何利用一组多项式模型来分配专家判断的区间概率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Probabilities of judgments provided by unknown experts by using the imprecise Dirichlet model
Most models of aggregating expert judgments assume that there is available some information characterizing the experts. This information may be incorporated into the so-called hierarchical uncertainty models (second-order models). However, we often do not know anything about experts or it is difficult to evaluate their quality. In this case, beliefs to experts may be in the interval [0, 1] and the resulting assessments become to be non-informative. Moreover, attempts to assign some weights or beliefs to experts were not crowned with success because the behavior of experts may be distinguished in different circumstances. Therefore, this paper proposes to estimate expert judgm ents instead of experts themselves and studies how to assign interval probabilities of expert judgments by using a set of multinomial models.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Multi-attribute decision making and public perceptions of risk in relation to large scale environmental projects Is safety culture in differing organizations the same thing? a comparison of safety culture measures in three organizations Risk events and learning from error: when are assessments of the risk of unemployment revised? On not wanting to know and not wanting to inform others: choices regarding predictive genetic testing Making decisions for incident management in nuclear power plants using probabilistic safety assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1