Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 61

Decision Analysis

Chapter 12

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-1

Chapter Topics

Components of Decision Making Decision Making without Probabilities Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Analysis with Additional Information

Utility

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-2

Decision Analysis Components of Decision Making


A state of nature is an actual event that may occur in the future.

A payoff table is a means of organizing a decision situation, presenting the payoffs from different decisions given the various states of nature.

Table 12.1 Payoff Table


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-3

Decision Analysis Decision Making Without Probabilities

Figure 12.1

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-4

Decision Analysis Decision Making without Probabilities

Table 12.2

Decision-Making Criteria maximax maximin minimax

minimax regret

Hurwicz

equal likelihood
12-5

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Decision Making without Probabilities Maximax Criterion


In the maximax criterion the decision maker selects the decision that will result in the maximum of maximum payoffs; an optimistic criterion.

Table 12.3 Payoff Table Illustrating a Maximax Decision


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-6

Decision Making without Probabilities Maximin Criterion


In the maximin criterion the decision maker selects the decision that will reflect the maximum of the minimum payoffs; a pessimistic criterion.

Table 12.4 Payoff Table Illustrating a Maximin Decision


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-7

Decision Making without Probabilities Minimax Regret Criterion


Regret is the difference between the payoff from the best
decision and all other decision payoffs. The decision maker attempts to avoid regret by selecting the decision alternative that minimizes the maximum regret.

Table 12.6 Regret Table Illustrating the Minimax Regret Decision


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-8

Decision Making without Probabilities Hurwicz Criterion


The Hurwicz criterion is a compromise between the maximax and maximin criterion.
A coefficient of optimism, , is a measure of the decision makers optimism. The Hurwicz criterion multiplies the best payoff by and the worst payoff by 1- ., for each decision, and the best result is selected.

Decision
Apartment building Office building

Values
$50,000(.4) + 30,000(.6) = 38,000 $100,000(.4) - 40,000(.6) = 16,000

Warehouse

$30,000(.4) + 10,000(.6) = 18,000


12-9

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Decision Making without Probabilities Equal Likelihood Criterion


The equal likelihood ( or Laplace) criterion multiplies the decision payoff for each state of nature by an equal weight, thus assuming that the states of nature are equally likely to occur. Decision Apartment building Values $50,000(.5) + 30,000(.5) = 40,000

Office building
Warehouse

$100,000(.5) - 40,000(.5) = 30,000


$30,000(.5) + 10,000(.5) = 20,000

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-10

Decision Making without Probabilities Summary of Criteria Results


A dominant decision is one that has a better payoff than another decision under each state of nature.
The appropriate criterion is dependent on the risk personality and philosophy of the decision maker. Criterion Maximax Maximin Minimax regret Hurwicz Equal likelihood
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Decision (Purchase) Office building Apartment building Apartment building Apartment building Apartment building
12-11

Decision Making without Probabilities Solution with QM for Windows (1 of 3)

Exhibit 12.1
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-12

Decision Making without Probabilities Solution with QM for Windows (2 of 3)

Exhibit 12.2
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-13

Decision Making without Probabilities Solution with QM for Windows (3 of 3)

Exhibit 12.3
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-14

Decision Making without Probabilities Solution with Excel

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Exhibit 12.4

12-15

Decision Making with Probabilities Expected Value


Expected value is computed by multiplying each decision
outcome under each state of nature by the probability of its occurrence.

Table 12.7

EV(Apartment) = $50,000(.6) + 30,000(.4) = 42,000 EV(Office) = $100,000(.6) - 40,000(.4) = 44,000 EV(Warehouse) = $30,000(.6) + 10,000(.4) = 22,000
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-16

Decision Making with Probabilities Expected Opportunity Loss


The expected opportunity loss is the expected value of the regret for each decision. The expected value and expected opportunity loss criterion result in the same decision.

EOL(Apartment) = $50,000(.6) + 0(.4) = 30,000 EOL(Office) = $0(.6) + 70,000(.4) = 28,000 EOL(Warehouse) = $70,000(.6) + 20,000(.4) = 50,000
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Table 12.8

12-17

Expected Value Problems Solution with QM for Windows

Exhibit 12.5
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-18

Expected Value Problems Solution with Excel and Excel QM (1 of 2)

Exhibit 12.6
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-19

Expected Value Problems Solution with Excel and Excel QM (2 of 2)

Exhibit 12.7
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-20

Decision Making with Probabilities Expected Value of Perfect Information


The expected value of perfect information (EVPI) is the maximum amount a decision maker would pay for additional information. EVPI equals the expected value given perfect information minus the expected value without perfect information. EVPI equals the expected opportunity loss (EOL) for the best decision.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-21

Decision Making with Probabilities EVPI Example (1 of 2)

Table 12.9 Payoff Table with Decisions, Given Perfect Information


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-22

Decision Making with Probabilities EVPI Example (2 of 2)


Decision with perfect information: $100,000(.60) + 30,000(.40) = $72,000 Decision without perfect information: EV(office) = $100,000(.60) - 40,000(.40) = $44,000 EVPI = $72,000 - 44,000 = $28,000 EOL(office) = $0(.60) + 70,000(.4) = $28,000

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-23

Decision Making with Probabilities EVPI with QM for Windows

Exhibit 12.8
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-24

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees (1 of 4)


A decision tree is a diagram consisting of decision nodes (represented as squares), probability nodes (circles), and decision alternatives (branches).

Table 12.10 Payoff Table for Real Estate Investment Example


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-25

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees (2 of 4)

Figure 12.2 Decision Tree for Real Estate Investment Example


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-26

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees (3 of 4)


The expected value is computed at each probability node: EV(node 2) = .60($50,000) + .40(30,000) = $42,000

EV(node 3) = .60($100,000) + .40(-40,000) = $44,000


EV(node 4) = .60($30,000) + .40(10,000) = $22,000

Branches with the greatest expected value are selected.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-27

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees (4 of 4)

Figure 12.3 Decision Tree with Expected Value at Probability Nodes


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-28

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees with QM for Windows

Exhibit 12.9
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-29

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees with Excel and TreePlan (1 of 4)

Exhibit 12.10

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-30

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees with Excel and TreePlan (2 of 4)

Exhibit 12.11
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-31

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees with Excel and TreePlan (3 of 4)

Exhibit 12.12
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-32

Decision Making with Probabilities Decision Trees with Excel and TreePlan (4 of 4)

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Exhibit 12.13

12-33

Decision Making with Probabilities Sequential Decision Trees (1 of 4)


A sequential decision tree is used to illustrate a situation requiring a series of decisions.
Used where a payoff table, limited to a single decision, cannot be used. Real estate investment example modified to encompass a tenyear period in which several decisions must be made:

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-34

Decision Making with Probabilities Sequential Decision Trees (2 of 4)

Figure 12.4 Sequential Decision Tree


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-35

Decision Making with Probabilities Sequential Decision Trees (3 of 4)


Decision is to purchase land; highest net expected value ($1,160,000). Payoff of the decision is $1,160,000.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-36

Decision Making with Probabilities Sequential Decision Trees (4 of 4)

Figure 12.5 Sequential Decision Tree with Nodal Expected Values


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-37

Sequential Decision Tree Analysis Solution with QM for Windows

Exhibit 12.14
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-38

Sequential Decision Tree Analysis Solution with Excel and TreePlan

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Exhibit 12.15

12-39

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Bayesian Analysis (1 of 3)


Bayesian analysis uses additional information to alter the marginal probability of the occurrence of an event. In real estate investment example, using expected value criterion, best decision was to purchase office building with expected value of $444,000, and EVPI of $28,000.

Table 12.11
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-40

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Bayesian Analysis (2 of 3)


A conditional probability is the probability that an event will occur given that another event has already occurred.
Economic analyst provides additional information for real estate investment decision, forming conditional probabilities: g = good economic conditions p = poor economic conditions P = positive economic report N = negative economic report P(Pg) = .80 P(Pp) = .10 P(NG) = .20 P(Np) = .90

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-41

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Bayesian Analysis (3 of 3)


A posterior probability is the altered marginal probability of an event based on additional information.
Prior probabilities for good or poor economic conditions in real estate decision: P(g) = .60; P(p) = .40 Posterior probabilities by Bayes rule: (gP) = P(PG)P(g)/[P(Pg)P(g) + P(Pp)P(p)] = (.80)(.60)/[(.80)(.60) + (.10)(.40)] = .923 Posterior (revised) probabilities for decision: P(gN) = .250 P(pP) = .077 P(pN) = .750
12-42

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Decision Trees with Posterior Probabilities (1 of 4)
Decision tree with posterior probabilities differ from earlier versions in that: Two new branches at beginning of tree represent report outcomes. Probabilities of each state of nature are posterior probabilities from Bayes rule.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-43

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Decision Trees with Posterior Probabilities (2 of 4)

Figure 12.6 Decision Tree with Posterior Probabilities


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-44

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Decision Trees with Posterior Probabilities (3 of 4)
EV (apartment building) = $50,000(.923) + 30,000(.077)
= $48,460 EV (strategy) = $89,220(.52) + 35,000(.48) = $63,194

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-45

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Decision Trees with Posterior Probabilities (4 of 4)

Figure 12.7 Decision Tree Analysis


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-46

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Computing Posterior Probabilities with Tables

Table 12.12 Computation of Posterior Probabilities


Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-47

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Computing Posterior Probabilities with Excel

Exhibit 12.16
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-48

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Expected Value of Sample Information


The expected value of sample information (EVSI) is the difference between the expected value with and without information:
For example problem, EVSI = $63,194 - 44,000 = $19,194 The efficiency of sample information is the ratio of the expected value of sample information to the expected value of perfect information:

efficiency = EVSI /EVPI = $19,194/ 28,000 = .68

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-49

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Utility (1 of 2)

Table 12.13 Payoff Table for Auto Insurance Example

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-50

Decision Analysis with Additional Information Utility (2 of 2)


Expected Cost (insurance) = .992($500) + .008(500) = $500
Expected Cost (no insurance) = .992($0) + .008(10,000) = $80 Decision should be do not purchase insurance, but people almost always do purchase insurance. Utility is a measure of personal satisfaction derived from money. Utiles are units of subjective measures of utility.

Risk averters forgo a high expected value to avoid a lowprobability disaster.


Risk takers take a chance for a bonanza on a very lowprobability event in lieu of a sure thing.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-51

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (1 of 9)


States of Nature Decision Expand Maintain Status Quo Sell now Good Foreign Competitive Conditions $ 800,000 1,300,000 320,000 Poor Foreign Competitive Conditions $ 500,000 -150,000 320,000

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-52

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (2 of 9)


a. Determine the best decision without probabilities using the 5 criteria of the chapter. b. Determine best decision with probabilities assuming .70 probability of good conditions, .30 of poor conditions. Use expected value and expected opportunity loss criteria. c. Compute expected value of perfect information. d. Develop a decision tree with expected value at the nodes. e. Given following, P(Pg) = .70, P(Ng) = .30, P(Pp) = 20, P(Np) = .80, determine posterior probabilities using Bayes rule. f. Perform a decision tree analysis using the posterior probability obtained in part e.
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-53

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (3 of 9)


Step 1 (part a): Determine decisions without probabilities.
Maximax Decision: Maintain status quo Decisions Maximum Payoffs

Expand Status quo Sell


Decisions Expand Status quo Sell

$800,000 1,300,000 (maximum) 320,000


Minimum Payoffs $500,000 (maximum) -150,000 320,000
12-54

Maximin Decision: Expand

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (4 of 9)


Minimax Regret Decision: Expand
Decisions Expand Maximum Regrets $500,000 (minimum)

Status quo
Sell

650,000
980,000

Hurwicz ( = .3) Decision: Expand

Expand
Status quo Sell

$800,000(.3) + 500,000(.7) = $590,000


$1,300,000(.3) - 150,000(.7) = $285,000 $320,000(.3) + 320,000(.7) = $320,000

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-55

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (5 of 9)


Equal Likelihood Decision: Expand
Expand Status quo $800,000(.5) + 500,000(.5) = $650,000 $1,300,000(.5) - 150,000(.5) = $575,000

Sell

$320,000(.5) + 320,000(.5) = $320,000

Step 2 (part b): Determine Decisions with EV and EOL. Expected value decision: Maintain status quo

Expand
Status quo Sell

$800,000(.7) + 500,000(.3) = $710,000


$1,300,000(.7) - 150,000(.3) = $865,000 $320,000(.7) + 320,000(.3) = $320,000

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-56

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (6 of 9)


Expected opportunity loss decision: Maintain status quo
Expand Status quo $500,000(.7) + 0(.3) = $350,000 0(.7) + 650,000(.3) = $195,000

Sell

$980,000(.7) + 180,000(.3) = $740,000

Step 3 (part c): Compute EVPI. EV given perfect information = 1,300,000(.7) + 500,000(.3) = $1,060,000 EV without perfect information = $1,300,000(.7) - 150,000(.3) = $865,000 EVPI = $1.060,000 - 865,000 = $195,000
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-57

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (7 of 9)


Step 4 (part d): Develop a decision tree.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-58

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (8 of 9)


Step 5 (part e): Determine posterior probabilities. P(gP) = P(Pg)P(g)/[P(Pg)P(g) + P(Pp)P(p)] = (.70)(.70)/[(.70)(.70) + (.20)(.30)] = .891 P(pP) = .109 P(gN) = P(Ng)P(g)/[P(Ng)P(g) + P(Np)P(p)] = (.30)(.70)/[(.30)(.70) + (.80)(.30)] = .467 P(pN) = .533
Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-59

Decision Analysis Example Problem Solution (9 of 9)


Step 6 (part f): Decision tree analysis.

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-60

Copyright 2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall

12-61

Вам также может понравиться