• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >Robust Climate Policies Under Uncertainty: A Comparison of Robust Decision Making and Info-Gap Methods
【24h】

Robust Climate Policies Under Uncertainty: A Comparison of Robust Decision Making and Info-Gap Methods

机译：不确定性下的稳健气候政策：稳健决策和信息鸿沟方法的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

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.
机译：这项研究比较了两种广泛用于决策问题鲁棒性分析的方法：Ben-Haim最初开发的信息间隙方法和Lempert，Popper和Bankes最初开发的鲁棒决策方法（RDM）。鉴于气候系统中存在非线性阈值响应的潜力，这种阈值响应的显着不确定性以及各种其他关键参数以及学习能力，该研究使用每种方法来评估改变气候的温室气体排放的替代路径。关于随时间推移的任何阈值响应。信息差距和RDM有许多相似之处。两者都将不确定性表示为一组可能的期货，并且都试图确定性能对不确定性不敏感的稳健策略。然而，它们也表现出重要的差异，因为它们以不同的顺序排列分析，以不同的方式对待损失和收益，并采用不同的方法来获取不准确的概率信息。研究发现，这两种方法具有相似但不完全相同的政策建议，并且它们的不同属性引起了有关在决策支持应用程序中其适当角色的重要问题。这种比较不仅可以增进对这些特定方法的理解，还可以提供对鲁棒性方法和用于比较它们的框架的一些更广泛的见解。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Risk analysis》 |2012年第10期|p.1657-1672|共16页
  • 作者

    Jim W. Hall; Robert J. Lempert; Klaus Keller; Andrew Hackbarth; Christophe Mijere; David J. Mclnerney;

  • 作者单位

    Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK;

    Robert J. Lempert, Director RAND Pardee Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA;

    Department of Geosciences and Earth and Environmental Systems Institute, Penn State, University Park, PA, USA;

    Robert J. Lempert, Director RAND Pardee Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA;

    School for Energy, Water and Environment - ENSE3, Grenoble Institute of Technology, Grenoble INP, France;

    Department of the Geophysical Sciences, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    abrupt change; climate change; deep uncertainty; info-gap; robust decision making;

    机译：突变气候变化;深刻的不确定性;信息差距强有力的决策;

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号