Asymptotic Equivalence of Probabilistic Serial and Random Priority Mechanisms

The random priority (random serial dictatorship) mechanism is a common method for assigning objects. The mechanism is easy to implement and strategy‐proof. However, this mechanism is inefficient, because all agents may be made better off by another mechanism that increases their chances of obtaining more preferred objects. This form of inefficiency is eliminated by a mechanism called probabilistic serial, but this mechanism is not strategy‐proof. Thus, which mechanism to employ in practical applications is an open question. We show that these mechanisms become equivalent when the market becomes large. More specifically, given a set of object types, the random assignments in these mechanisms converge to each other as the number of copies of each object type approaches infinity. Thus, the inefficiency of the random priority mechanism becomes small in large markets. Our result gives some rationale for the common use of the random priority mechanism in practical problems such as student placement in public schools.     

Priority Setting for the Distribution of Localized Hazard Protection

We address the problem of distributing safety-enhancing devices across a region, where each identical device provides for only local protection of the population. The devices protect nonidentical sectors of the population. The sectors of population are exposed to nonidentical intensities of hazard. A method for the screening and prioritizing of needs for the protective devices is described. An approach of risk-benefit-cost analysis under uncertainty is recommended as follows. Measures of hazard intensity and population exposure are identified. Exogenous parameters that influence assessments of risks, benefits, and costs are identified. Uncertainties of the exogenous parameters are propagated by interval analysis. Several tiers of the plausibility of need for protection are identified. The tiers are useful in setting priorities for the distribution of the safety devices. The method is demonstrated in an engineering application to roadway lighting, but has implications for disaster preparedness, anti-terrorism, transportation safety, and other arenas of public safety.     

三端点区间数互反判断矩阵的排序方法研究

本文研究了三端点区间数互反判断矩阵的一致性和排序方法。在三端点区间数互反判断矩阵完全一致性概念的基础上,首次将矩阵特征向量思想引入三端点区间数互反判断矩阵之中——研究了三端点区间数互反判断矩阵的一致性与权重向量之间的类似特征向量关系,并运用线性规划模型给出一种处理三端点区间数决策者对方案属性权重的方法,然后通过三端点区间数权重向量的期望值,进行方案集结排序。最后通过具体的案例,验证了所提出方法的有效性和适用性。     

模糊C-OWG算子及其在三角模糊数互反判断矩阵排序中的应用

本文研究了决策信息以三角模糊数互反判断矩阵形式给出的有限方案决策问题。首先定义了模糊C-OWG(FC-OWG)算子和期望模糊C-OWG(EFC-OWG)算子,并研究了它们的一些性质。基于FC-OWG算子和EFC-OWG算子,提出了方案偏好信息为三角模糊数互反判断矩阵的方案排序方法,根据决策者的偏好程度进行调节,并利用决策者的偏好程度对排序结果进行敏感性分析。实例表明,新方法计算简单、可行且有效。     

区间数互补判断矩阵的一致性及其排序研究

由于目前国内外文献对区间数互补判断矩阵的性质研究较少,从而使得对排序方法的相关研究缺乏理论依据.针对这些缺陷,本文研究了区间数互补判断矩阵的性质及其排序方法问题.根据区间数互补判断矩阵的定义,给出了区间数互补判断矩阵的一致性、严格强传递性与弱传递性等定义,并研究了一致性判断矩阵的性质,并说明这些性质更符合人们的思维特征.在一致性性质的基础上建立了区间数互补判断矩阵排序的非线性规划模型,算例分析表明该方法是有效可行的.     

Updating Parameters of the Chicken Processing Line Model

A mathematical model of chicken processing that quantitatively describes the transmission of Campylobacter on chicken carcasses from slaughter to chicken meat product has been developed in Nauta et al. (2005). This model was quantified with expert judgment. Recent availability of data allows updating parameters of the model to better describe processes observed in slaughterhouses. We propose Bayesian updating as a suitable technique to update expert judgment with microbiological data. Berrang and Dickens's data are used to demonstrate performance of this method in updating parameters of the chicken processing line model.     

Source Attribution of Food-Borne Zoonoses in New Zealand: A Modified Hald Model

A Bayesian approach was developed by Hald et al .^{( 1 )} to estimate the contribution of different food sources to the burden of human salmonellosis in Denmark. This article describes the development of several modifications that can be used to adapt the model to different countries and pathogens. Our modified Hald model has several advantages over the original approach, which include the introduction of uncertainty in the estimates of source prevalence and an improved strategy for identifiability. We have applied our modified model to the two major food-borne zoonoses in New Zealand, namely, campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis. Major challenges were the data quality for salmonellosis and the inclusion of environmental sources of campylobacteriosis. We conclude that by modifying the Hald model we have improved its identifiability, made it more applicable to countries with less intensive surveillance, and feasible for other pathogens, in particular with respect to the inclusion of nonfood sources. The wider application and better understanding of this approach is of particular importance due to the value of the model for decision making and risk management.     

Challenges to the Acceptance of Probabilistic Risk Analysis

This paper discusses a number of the key challenges to the acceptance and application of probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). Those challenges include: (a) the extensive reliance on subjective judgment in PRA, requiring the development of guidance for the use of PRA in risk-informed regulation, and possibly the development of robust or reference prior distributions to minimize the reliance on judgment; and (b) the treatment of human performance in PRA, including not only human error per se but also management and organizational factors more broadly. All of these areas are seen as presenting interesting research challenges at the interface between engineering and other disciplines.     

Reducing Overconfidence in the Interval Judgments of Experts

Elicitation of expert opinion is important for risk analysis when only limited data are available. Expert opinion is often elicited in the form of subjective confidence intervals; however, these are prone to substantial overconfidence. We investigated the influence of elicitation question format, in particular the number of steps in the elicitation procedure. In a 3‐point elicitation procedure, an expert is asked for a lower limit, upper limit, and best guess, the two limits creating an interval of some assigned confidence level (e.g., 80%). In our 4‐step interval elicitation procedure, experts were also asked for a realistic lower limit, upper limit, and best guess, but no confidence level was assigned; the fourth step was to rate their anticipated confidence in the interval produced. In our three studies, experts made interval predictions of rates of infectious diseases (Study 1, n = 21 and Study 2, n = 24: epidemiologists and public health experts), or marine invertebrate populations (Study 3, n = 34: ecologists and biologists). We combined the results from our studies using meta‐analysis, which found average overconfidence of 11.9%, 95% CI [3.5, 20.3] (a hit rate of 68.1% for 80% intervals)—a substantial decrease in overconfidence compared with previous studies. Studies 2 and 3 suggest that the 4‐step procedure is more likely to reduce overconfidence than the 3‐point procedure (Cohen's d = 0.61, [0.04, 1.18]).     

Regulating Under Uncertainty: Newsboy for Exposure Limits

Setting action levels or limits for health protection is complicated by uncertainty in the dose-response relation across a range of hazards and exposures. To address this issue, we consider the classic newsboy problem. The principles used to manage uncertainty for that case are applied to two stylized exposure examples, one for high dose and high dose rate radiation and the other for ammonia. Both incorporate expert judgment on uncertainty quantification in the dose-response relationship. The mathematical technique of probabilistic inversion also plays a key role. We propose a coupled approach, whereby scientists quantify the dose-response uncertainty using techniques such as structured expert judgment with performance weights and probabilistic inversion, and stakeholders quantify associated loss rates.     

Uncertainties in Nuclear Probabilistic Risk Analyses

There are many uncertainties in a probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). We identify the different types of uncertainties and describe their implications. We then summarize the uncertainty analyses which have performed in current PRAs and characterize results which have been obtained. We draw conclusions regarding interpretations of uncertainties, areas having largest uncertainties, and needs which exist in uncertainty analysis. We finally characterize the robustness of various utilizations of PRA results.     

Public Understanding of Ebola Risks: Mastering an Unfamiliar Threat

Ebola was the most widely followed news story in the United States in October 2014. Here, we ask what members of the U.S. public learned about the disease, given the often chaotic media environment. Early in 2015, we surveyed a representative sample of 3,447 U.S. residents about their Ebola‐related beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Where possible, we elicited judgments in terms sufficiently precise to allow comparing them to scientific estimates (e.g., the death toll to date and the probability of dying once ill). Respondents’ judgments were generally consistent with one another, with scientific knowledge, and with their self‐reported behavioral responses and policy preferences. Thus, by the time the threat appeared to have subsided in the United States, members of the public, as a whole, had seemingly mastered its basic contours. Moreover, they could express their beliefs in quantitative terms. Judgments of personal risk were weakly and inconsistently related to reported gender, age, education, income, or political ideology. Better educated and wealthier respondents saw population risks as lower; females saw them as higher. More politically conservative respondents saw Ebola as more transmissible and expressed less support for public health policies. In general, respondents supported providing “honest, accurate information, even if that information worried people.” These results suggest the value of proactive communications designed to inform the lay public's decisions, thoughts, and emotions, and informed by concurrent surveys of their responses and needs.     

Expert Judgment-Based Risk Assessment Using Statistical Scenario Analysis: A Case Study—Running the Bulls in Pamplona (Spain)

In this article, we present a methodology to assess the risk incurred by a participant in an activity involving danger of injury. The lack of high-quality historical data for the case considered prevented us from constructing a sufficiently detailed statistical model. It was therefore decided to generate a risk assessment model based on expert judgment. The methodology is illustrated in a real case context: the assessment of risk to participants in a San Fermin bull-run in Pamplona (Spain). The members of the panel of "experts on the bull-run" represented very different perspectives on the phenomenon: runners, surgeons and other health care personnel, journalists, civil defense workers, security staff, organizers, herdsmen, authors of books on the bull-run, etc. We consulted 55 experts. Our methodology includes the design of a survey instrument to elicit the experts' views and the statistical and mathematical procedures used to aggregate their subjective opinions.     

Insight into “Calculated Risk”: An Application to the Prioritization of Emerging Infectious Diseases for Blood Transfusion Safety

Increasing identification of transmissions of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) by blood transfusion raised the question which of these EIDs poses the highest risk to blood safety. For a number of the EIDs that are perceived to be a threat to blood safety, evidence on actual disease or transmission characteristics is lacking, which might render measures against such EIDs disputable. On the other hand, the fact that we call them “emerging” implies almost by definition that we are uncertain about at least some of their characteristics. So what is the relative importance of various disease and transmission characteristics, and how are these influenced by the degree of uncertainty associated with their actual values? We identified the likelihood of transmission by blood transfusion, the presence of an asymptomatic phase of infection, prevalence of infection, and the disease impact as the main characteristics of the perceived risk of disease transmission by blood transfusion. A group of experts in the field of infectious diseases and blood transfusion ranked sets of (hypothetical) diseases with varying degrees of uncertainty associated with their disease characteristics, and used probabilistic inversion to obtain probability distributions for the weight of each of these risk characteristics. These distribution weights can be used to rank both existing and newly emerging infectious diseases with (partially) known characteristics. Analyses show that in case there is a lack of data concerning disease characteristics, it is the uncertainty concerning the asymptomatic phase and the disease impact that are the most important drivers of the perceived risk. On the other hand, if disease characteristics are well established, it is the prevalence of infection and the transmissibility of the disease by blood transfusion that will drive the perceived risk. The risk prioritization model derived provides an easy to obtain and rational expert assessment of the relative importance of an (emerging) infectious disease, requiring only a limited amount of information. Such a model might be used to justify a rational and proportional response to an emerging infectious disease, especially in situations where little or no specific information is available.     

面向制造业务国际化的竞争优先权转移研究

从企业国际化的视角,研究了制造业务国际化过程中的竞争优先权转移问题。在对竞争优先权理论文献研究的基础上,提出研究命题:对于不同制造业务国际化类型的制造企业,其所选择的竞争优先权不尽相同。在IMSS2009的支持下,基于制造业务国际化程度,将企业分为本土、本洲以及全球制造型企业,分析了国际化制造企业的竞争优先权特征以及不同国际化程度的制造企业竞争优先权要素的特征差异。根据研究成果,构建了面向制造业务国际化的竞争优先权转移模型。     

Impartiality,Priority, and Solidarity in the Theory of Justice

The ethic of priority is a compromise between the extremely compensatory ethic of outcome equality and the needs‐blind ethic of resource equality. We propose an axiom of priority and characterize resource‐allocation rules that are impartial, prioritarian, and solidaristic. They comprise a class of rules that equalize across individuals some index of outcome and resources. Consequently, we provide an ethical rationalization for the many applications in which such indices have been used (e.g., the human development index, the index of primary goods, etc.).     

Percentiles of the Product of Uncertainty Factors for Establishing Probabilistic Reference Doses

Exposure guidelines for potentially toxic substances are often based on a reference dose (RfD) that is determined by dividing a no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL), lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level (LOAEL), or benchmark dose (BD) corresponding to a low level of risk, by a product of uncertainty factors. The uncertainty factors for animal to human extrapolation, variable sensitivities among humans, extrapolation from measured subchronic effects to unknown results for chronic exposures, and extrapolation from a LOAEL to a NOAEL can be thought of as random variables that vary from chemical to chemical. Selected databases are examined that provide distributions across chemicals of inter- and intraspecies effects, ratios of LOAELs to NOAELs, and differences in acute and chronic effects, to illustrate the determination of percentiles for uncertainty factors. The distributions of uncertainty factors tend to be approximately lognormally distributed. The logarithm of the product of independent uncertainty factors is approximately distributed as the sum of normally distributed variables, making it possible to estimate percentiles for the product. Hence, the size of the products of uncertainty factors can be selected to provide adequate safety for a large percentage (e.g., approximately 95%) of RfDs. For the databases used to describe the distributions of uncertainty factors, using values of 10 appear to be reasonable and conservative. For the databases examined the following simple "Rule of 3s" is suggested that exceeds the estimated 95th percentile of the product of uncertainty factors: If only a single uncertainty factor is required use 33, for any two uncertainty factors use 3 x 33 approximately 100, for any three uncertainty factors use a combined factor of 3 x 100 = 300, and if all four uncertainty factors are needed use a total factor of 3 x 300 = 900. If near the 99th percentile is desired use another factor of 3. An additional factor may be needed for inadequate data or a modifying factor for other uncertainties (e.g., different routes of exposure) not covered above.     

Prioritizing Environmental Health Risks in the UAE

This article presents the results of a comparative environmental risk‐ranking exercise that was conducted in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to inform a strategic planning process led by the Environment Agency‐Abu Dhabi (EAD). It represents the first national‐level application of a deliberative method for comparative risk ranking first published in this journal. The deliberative method involves a five‐stage process that includes quantitative risk assessment by experts and deliberations by groups of stakeholders. The project reported in this article considered 14 categories of environmental risks to health identified through discussions with EAD staff: ambient and indoor air pollution; drinking water contamination; coastal water pollution; soil and groundwater contamination; contamination of fruits, vegetables, and seafood; ambient noise; stratospheric ozone depletion; electromagnetic fields from power lines; health impacts from climate change; and exposure to hazardous substances in industrial, construction, and agricultural work environments. Results from workshops involving 73 stakeholders who met in five separate groups to rank these risks individually and collaboratively indicated strong consensus that outdoor and indoor air pollution are the highest priorities in the UAE. Each of the five groups rated these as being among the highest risks. All groups rated soil and groundwater contamination as being among the lowest risks. In surveys administered after the ranking exercises, participants indicated that the results of the process represented their concerns and approved of using the ranking results to inform policy decisions. The results ultimately shaped a strategic plan that is now being implemented.     

群组AHP排序的几何最小二乘方法

本文在文献[1]不完全AHP排序方法的基础上给出群组AHP排序的几何最小二乘方法(GLSM).鉴于不同专家所给判断矩阵质量上的差异,GLSM排序方法对群组AHP进行不同程度的加权处理,并进行群组一致性检验。