Table of contents:
The following is a list of new info-gap publications. If you want to be on the list, send me the details of your info-gap publication.
- Riegels, N., Jensen, R., Bensasson, L., Banou, S., Møller, F. and Bauer-Gottwein, P. (2011)
Estimating resource costs of compliance with EU WFD ecological status requirements at the river basin scale
Journal of Hydrology, 396:197-214.
- Keith J. Beven and Ruth E. Alcock (2011).
Modelling everything everywhere: a new approach to decision-making for water management under uncertainty.
Freshwater Biology, in press 2011.
- R . Xu , H . Tang and S . Xue (2011).
Structural robust design based on Info-Gap model.
In Jinrong Zhu (editor), Modelling and Computation in Engineering, pp. 67–71. CRC Press.
- Vanessa M. Adams and Robert L. Pressey (2011)
An info-gap model to examine the robustness of cost-efficient budget allocations
ICVRAM 2011: 1st International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Assessment and Management, April 11-13, 2011, University of Maryland, College Park, pp. 971-979.
- Lior Davidovitch and Yakov Ben-Haim (2011)
Robust resource allocation: An info-gap approach, ICVRAM 2011: 1st International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Assessment and Management, April 11-13, 2011, University of Maryland, College Park, pp. 988-995.
- Eve McDonald-Madden, Peter W.J. Baxter and Hugh Possibgham (2011)
Robust conservation decision-making, International Conference on Vulnerability and Risk Analysis and Management, ICVRAM 2011 and the International Symposium on Uncertainty Modeling and Analysis, ISUMA 2011, Hyattsville, MD, 11-13 April 2011, pp. 945-952.
- Robert Lempert and Nidhi Kalra (2011)
Managing Climate Risks in Developing Countries with Robust Decision Making, World Resources Report, Washington. DC. Available at: http://www.worldresourcesreport.org.
Isn't it amazing that the flow of info-gap publications continues?
Let me know of any other publications that should be on this list.
- Ben-Haim (2001, 2006): Info-Gap Decision Theory: decisions under severe uncertainty.
- Regan et al (2005): Robust decision-making under severe uncertainty for conservation management.
- Moilanen et al (2006): Planning for robust reserve networks using uncertainty analysis.
- Burgman (2008): Shakespeare, Wald and decision making under severe uncertainty.
- Ben-Haim and Demertzis (2008): Confidence in monetary policy.
- Hall and Harvey (2009): Decision making under severe uncertainty for flood risk management: a case study of info-gap robustness analysis.
- Ben-Haim (2009): Info-gap forecasting and the advantage of sub-optimal models.
- Yokomizo et al (2009): Managing the impact of invasive species: the value of knowing the density-impact curve.
- Davidovitch et al (2009): Info-gap theory and robust design of surveillance for invasive species: The case study of Barrow Island.
- Ben-Haim et al (2009): Do we know how to set decision thresholds for diabetes?
- Beresford and Thompson (2009): An info-gap approach to managing portfolios of assets with uncertain returns.
- Ben-Haim, Dacso, Carrasco, and Rajan (2009): Heterogeneous uncertainties in cholesterol management.
- Rout, Thompson, and McCarthy (2009): Robust decisions for declaring eradication of invasive species.
- Ben-Haim (2010): Info-Gap Economics: An Operational Introduction.
- Hine and Hall (2010): Information gap analysis of flood model uncertainties and regional frequency analysis.
- Ben-Haim (2010): Interpreting Null Results from Measurements with Uncertain Correlations: An Info-Gap Approach
- Wintle et al. (2010): Allocating monitoring effort in the face of unknown unknowns
- Moffitt et al. (2010): Securing the Border from Invasives: Robust Inspections under Severe Uncertainty
- Yemshanov et al. (2010): Robustness of Risk Maps and Survey Networks to Knowledge Gaps About a New Invasive Pest
- Davidovitch and Ben-Haim (2010): Robust satisficing voting: why are uncertain voters biased towards sincerity?
- Schwartz et al. (2010): What Makes a Good Decision? Robust Satisficing as a Normative Standard of Rational Decision Making
- Arkadeb Ghosal et al. (2010): Computing Robustness of FlexRay Schedules to Uncertainties in Design Parameters
- Hemez et al. (2002): Info-gap robustness for the correlation of tests and simulations of a non-linear transient
- Hemez et al. (2003): Applying information-gap reasoning to the predictive accuracy assessment of transient dynamics simulations
- Hemez, F.M. and Ben-Haim, Y. (2004): Info-gap robustness for the correlation of tests and simulations of a non-linear transient
- Ben-Haim, Y. (2007): Frequently asked questions about info-gap decision theory
- Sprenger, J. (2011): The Precautionary Approach and the Role of Scientists in Environmental Decision-Making
- Sprenger, J. (2011): Precaution with the Precautionary Principle: How does it help in making decisions
-
Hall et al. (2011) : Robust climate policies under uncertainty: A comparison of Info-‐Gap and RDM methods
-
Ben-Haim and Cogan (2011) : Linear bounds on an uncertain non-linear oscillator: an info-gap approach
-
Van der Burg and Tyre (2011) : Integrating info-gap decision theory with robust population management: a case study using the Mountain Plover
-
Hildebrandt and Knoke (2011) : Investment decisions under uncertainty --- A methodological review on forest science studies.
-
Wintle et al. (2011) : Ecological–economic optimization of biodiversity conservation under climate change.
-
Ranger et al. (2010) : Adaptation in the UK: a decision-making process.
I shall expand the list as required as this project progresses. If you can't wait, send me a note about your very special Reader-type.
Let me know of any articles/books that you think should appear on this list.
In addition to a brief commentary on the Info-Gap content of the publications, I also provide TUIGF, SNHNSNDN and GIGO scores (%) (see below).
Over the past two years I have been asked, on several occasions, the following intriguing question:
Given that the flaws in Info-Gap decision theory are so obvious and grave, how do you explain the large number of publications on Info-Gap, particularly the significant number of articles published by refereed journals?
My usual answer to this question is as follows:
I'll be happy to discuss this matter with you over a cup of coffee (skinny latte, please!)
I do not plan to deviate from this answer here.
However, I believe that the reviews that I provide here will give you a good idea of what I may tell you over a cup of coffee so, try to read between the lines. And, for a fuller appreciation of one of the central points that I am making in this collection of reviews, read the discussion on fog, spin and rhetoric. Because, as you will see, whatever Info-Gap decision theory lacks in substance and rigor, is made up for, and covered up, by heavy fog, spin, and rhetoric.
I use the acronym TUIGF as shorthand for "The usual Info-Gap flaws". These flaws are discussed in detail in my compilation of FAQs about Info-Gap so there is no need to elaborate on them in these reviews. On the other hand, they will be used as benchmarks.
I also use the acronym SNHNSNDN as shorthand for "see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing, do nothing". This refers to authors who, for various reasons, choose to ignore my criticism of Info-Gap decision theory, particularly my theorems proving that Info-Gap's robustness model is a Maximin model (circa 1940) and Info-Gap's opportuneness model is a Minimin model (circa 1952). For your convenience and enjoyment these beauties are displayed at the bottom of the page.
So, recall that Info-Gap's two main fundamental flaws are:
The question therefore arises: how is it that so many Info-Gap papers have been published in refereed journals? Surely, the flaws are so obvious that any referee with a basic knowledge of decision-making under severe uncertainty should have been able to identify them.
Indeed, even more basic is the point that Info-Gap scholars who should know better continue to publish Info-Gap papers, repeating the same unsubstantiated claims, again and again and again.
The objective of my reviews is to show these publications for what they are.
I do not have strict criteria for the selection of papers for review. For obvious reasons I prefer the more recent papers that were published in refereed journals. But I shall consider other papers, including working papers -- if they shed new light on on the failings of Info-Gap decision theory and its applications.
So the plan is to start with recently (2009) published papers, especially papers that attempt to deal with my criticism.
If you have come across a publication that you think ought to be reviewed, please send me a copy of it and I shall have a look at it to see if it is suitable for this project.
I realize that the potential readership of my reviews may be diverse with various interests and degrees of knowledge of decision theory in general and Info-Gap decision theory in particular.
My aim is to address my reviews, in the first instance, to the authors of the articles, the referees who reviewed them, the editors of the journals who accepted the papers for publication, and the bodies that provided the funds to support the work on which the articles are based. So, please read the reviews with this point in mind.
- My reviews are based on the (unrealistic) assumption that you have read the original publications.
- If you are conversant with classical decision theory you should be able to make sense of my reviews even if you have not read the publications themselves.
- Recall that according to Info-Gap decision theory, the robustness of decision d is defined as follows:
α(d,û) = max {α≥0: r(d,u) ≥ r*, ∀u∈U(α,û)}
where:
- d = decision;
- u = parameter of interest whose true value is subject severe uncertainty;
- û = estimate of the true value of u;
- α = size of the region of uncertainty;
- U(α,û) = uncertainty region of size α centered at û
- r* = critical level of performance;
- r(d,u) = level of performance attained by decision d if the true value of the parameter of interest is u;
- The constraint r(d,u) ≥ r* is referred to as the "performance requirement".
Let U denote the complete region of uncertainty. Roughly, this is a set that contains U(α,û) for all α≥0.
Any assessment of Info-Gap's contribution to the state of the art in decision theory must be made against these claims by Ben-Haim (2001, 2006) — the Father of Info-Gap:
Info-gap decision theory is radically different from all current theories of decision under uncertainty. The difference originates in the modeling of uncertainty as an information gap rather than as a probability. The need for info-gap modeling and management of uncertainty arises in dealing with severe lack of information and highly unstructured uncertainty.
Ben-Haim (2006, p. xii)
and
In this book we concentrate on the fairly new concept of information-gap uncertainty, whose differences from more classical approaches to uncertainty are real and deep. Despite the power of classical decision theories, in many areas such as engineering, economics, management, medicine and public policy, a need has arisen for a different format for decisions based on severely uncertain evidence.
Ben-Haim (2006, p. 11)
So my reviews address primarily the following two questions:
- Is Info-Gap radically different from classical decision theories?
- Does Info-Gap tackles the severity of the uncertainty?
As indicated above, the fact of the matter is that Info-Gap decision theory fails on both counts. So, it should come as no surprise that my criticism of Info-Gap decision theory is very harsh indeed.
The following mini-guide may be useful to some readers.
| Reader type
|
Tips
|
| Author |
Please, read the relevant FAQs cited in my reviews before you send me an angry letter. I'd be most happy to discuss your paper with you. |
| Referee |
If you were not vigilant enough, or not sufficiently au fait with the literature on decision-making under severe uncertainty, make sure that next time you are better prepared before you proceed to referee an Info-Gap paper. In any event, take note that Info-Gap's fundamental flaws cannot be smoothed over by fancy rhetoric. |
| Editor |
Make sure that you send Info-Gap papers to qualified referees. Please, do not send me Info-Gap papers for review. |
| Info-Gap aficionado |
Relax! You can ignore my criticism. This is in fact what Info-Gap scholars -- with some exceptions -- have done so far. |
| Inactive Info-Gap Critic |
Wake up! Join my campaign. |
| PhD Student |
Indeed, not everything that gets published in refereed journals is "correct". Also, PhD supervisors are not always well-versed in the subject matter and can fall victim to the adverse effects of spin and rhetoric. Therefore, study carefully the claims that are made in the Info-Gap literature. |
| Grantor of research funds |
Read carefully the research proposals. If a proposal is too good to be true, then rest assured that it is. In the case of decision-making under severe uncertainty, watch out for voodoo decision theories that are in violations of the GIGO Axiom, but are dressed up by spin. |
| Accidental tourist |
It would be a good idea to read the first 20 items in FAQs about Info-Gap decision theory before reading the reviews. |
