Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Risk Anal. 2012 Oct;32(10):1657-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01802.x. Epub 2012 Apr 22.
This study compares two widely used approaches for robustness analysis of decision problems: the info-gap method originally developed by Ben-Haim and the robust decision making (RDM) approach originally developed by Lempert, Popper, and Bankes. The study uses each approach to evaluate alternative paths for climate-altering greenhouse gas emissions given the potential for nonlinear threshold responses in the climate system, significant uncertainty about such a threshold response and a variety of other key parameters, as well as the ability to learn about any threshold responses over time. Info-gap and RDM share many similarities. Both represent uncertainty as sets of multiple plausible futures, and both seek to identify robust strategies whose performance is insensitive to uncertainties. Yet they also exhibit important differences, as they arrange their analyses in different orders, treat losses and gains in different ways, and take different approaches to imprecise probabilistic information. The study finds that the two approaches reach similar but not identical policy recommendations and that their differing attributes raise important questions about their appropriate roles in decision support applications. The comparison not only improves understanding of these specific methods, it also suggests some broader insights into robustness approaches and a framework for comparing them.
最初由本-海姆开发的信息间隙方法和最初由莱姆伯特、波普尔和班克斯开发的稳健决策方法。本研究使用每种方法来评估在气候系统中存在非线性阈值响应的情况下,改变温室气体排放的替代路径,同时考虑到对这种阈值响应以及其他各种关键参数的显著不确定性,以及随着时间的推移了解任何阈值响应的能力。信息间隙和稳健决策方法有许多相似之处。它们都将不确定性表示为多个合理未来的集合,并都试图确定稳健策略,这些策略的性能不受不确定性的影响。然而,它们也存在重要的差异,因为它们以不同的顺序安排分析,以不同的方式处理损失和收益,并采取不同的方法来处理不精确的概率信息。研究发现,这两种方法得出了相似但不完全相同的政策建议,它们的不同特点引发了关于它们在决策支持应用中适当作用的重要问题。这种比较不仅提高了对这些特定方法的理解,还为稳健性方法提供了一些更广泛的见解,并为比较它们提供了一个框架。