China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Aeronautical Decision Making: Metaphors, Models, and Methods
Published in Don Harris, Wen-Chin Li, Decision Making in Aviation, 2017
Wickens and Flach focus their attention on the decision point where the pilot must choose between several options. Wickens and Flach use the example of a pilot whose fuel gauges read empty considering a forced landing decision. Each option (e.g., continue on, land immediately) can be described in terms of possible outcomes (e.g., reach airport, disastrous landing) and associated probabilities (e.g., likelihood of having enough fuel). Following normative theory, the pilot’s task is clear: “the decision maker should choose the course of action with the most favorable expected outcome—the highest expected utility” (p. 133). Expected utility is derived by considering each option in turn and multiplying the value of each potential outcome by the likelihood of it occurring. Their description emphasizes the prescriptive nature of this representation and discusses how various heuristics and biases might derail the process. As Wickens and Flach noted, however, “their actual investigation in an aviation context has not been carried out” (p. 127).
Human Information Processing
Published in Julie A. Jacko, The Human–Computer Interaction Handbook, 2012
Robert W. Proctor, Kim-Phuong L. Vu
Humans often have to make choices for situations in which the outcome depends on events that are outside of their control. According to expected utility theory, a normative theory of decision making under uncertainty, the decision maker should determine the expected utility of a choice by multiplying the subjective utility of each outcome by the outcome’s probability and summing the resulting values (Hastie and Dawes 2010). The expected utility should be computed for each choice, and the optimal decision is the choice with the highest expected utility. It should be clear from this description that for all but the simplest of problems, a human decision maker cannot operate in this manner. To do so would require attending to multiple cues that exceed attentional capacity, accurate estimates of probabilities of various events, and maintenance of, and operation on, large amounts of information that exceeds STM capacity.
Aeronautical Decision Making: Metaphors, Models, and Methods
Published in Pamela S. Tsang, Michael A. Vidulich, Principles and Practice of Aviation Psychology, 2002
Wickens and Flach focus their attention on the decision point where the pilot must choose between several options. Wickens and Flach use the example of a pilot whose fuel gauges read empty considering a forced landing decision. Each option (e.g., continue on, land immediately) can be described in terms of possible outcomes (e.g., reach airport, disastrous landing) and associated probabilities (e.g., likelihood of having enough fuel). Following normative theory, the pilot’s task is clear: “the decision maker should choose the course of action with the most favorable expected outcome—the highest expected utility” (p. 133). Expected utility is derived by considering each option in turn and multiplying the value of each potential outcome by the likelihood of it occurring. Their description emphasizes the prescriptive nature of this representation and discusses how various heuristics and biases might derail the process. As Wickens and Flach noted, however, “their actual investigation in an aviation context has not been carried out” (p. 127).
Quantifying the value of SHM information for bridges under flood-induced scour
Published in Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2023
Pier Francesco Giordano, Luke J. Prendergast, Maria Pina Limongelli
When the VoI analysis is performed to decide if it is worth acquiring new information with a certain data acquisition strategy, this information (outcome ) is not yet available. In this case, the decision-maker must compute the expected utility associated with all possible outcomes. This is termed Pre-Posterior analysis and comprises two steps. Firstly, the Posterior analysis is performed for each possible outcome This implies the identification of the optimal action and the evaluation of the corresponding expected utility Secondly, the weighted sum of the expected utilities of the optimal actions is computed according to: where is computed according to Equation (3). The VoI represents the difference between (Pre-Posterior analysis), and the expected utility (Prior analysis):
A safety-case approach to the ethics of autonomous vehicles
Published in Safety and Reliability, 2020
Catherine Menon, Rob Alexander
Expected utility theory (von Neumann & Morgernstern, 1947) provides a model of risk perception which allows for an individual’s risk appetite and risk aversion. These properties are crucial when considering the ethics of AV use, as an individual’s perception of the novel risks presented by an AV will be affected by their risk appetite. As stated earlier, the current (human-driven) fleet also presents risks which have not necessarily been explicitly consented to, and the framing of the new AV risks as compared to the existing risks can have a significant effect on people’s perception of these.
A mean–variance acreage model
Published in Applicable Analysis, 2022
In economics, game theory, and decision theory, the expected utility hypothesis, concerning people's preferences under uncertainty, is a general approach to decision making under risk. Initiated by Daniel Bernoulli in 1738, the von Neumann-Morgenstern utility theorem provided a sound theoretical basis for expected utility theory in 1947. In general, mean–variance (MV) analysis is inconsistent with main axioms of rational choice theory, most notably with monotonicity axiom. Many efforts have been made to reconcile the two regimes [40–43].