An evaluation of multi‐criteria methods in integrated assessment of climate policy

Those who conduct integrated assessments (IAs) are aware of the need to explicitly consider multiple criteria and uncertainties when evaluating policies for preventing global warming. MCDM methods are potentially useful for understanding tradeoffs and evaluating risks associated with climate policy alternatives. A difficulty facing potential MCDM users is the wide range of different techniques that have been proposed, each with distinct advantages. Methods differ in terms of validity, ease of use, and appropriateness to the problem. Alternative methods also can yield strikingly different rankings of alternatives. A workshop was held in which climate change experts and policy makers evaluated the usefulness of MCDM for IA. Participants applied several methods in the context of a hypothetical greenhouse gas policy decision. Methods compared include value and utility functions, goal programming, ELECTRE, fuzzy sets, stochastic dominance, min max regret, and several weight selection methods. Ranges, rather than point estimates, were provided for some questions to incorporate imprecision regarding weights. Additionally, several visualization methods for both deterministic and uncertain cases were used and evaluated. Analysis of method results and participant feedback through questionnaires and discussion provide the basis for conclusions regarding the use of MCDM methods for climate change policy and IA analyses. Hypotheses are examined concerning predictive and convergent validity of methods, existence of splitting bias among experts, perceived ability of methods to aid decision‐making, and whether expressing imprecision can change ranking results. Because participants gained from viewing a problem from several perspectives and results from different methods often significantly differed, it appears worthwhile to apply several MCDM methods to increase user confidence and insight. The participants themselves recommended such multimethod approaches for policymaking. Yet they preferred the freedom of unaided decision‐making most of all, challenging the MCDM community to create transparent methods that permit maximum user control. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A caveat on the Savage–Dickey density ratio: The case of computing Bayes factors for regression parameters

The Savage–Dickey density ratio is a simple method for computing the Bayes factor for an equality constraint on one or more parameters of a statistical model. In regression analysis, this includes the important scenario of testing whether one or more of the covariates have an effect on the dependent variable. However, the Savage–Dickey ratio only provides the correct Bayes factor if the prior distribution of the nuisance parameters under the nested model is identical to the conditional prior under the full model given the equality constraint. This condition is violated for multiple regression models with a Jeffreys–Zellner–Siow prior, which is often used as a default prior in psychology. Besides linear regression models, the limitation of the Savage–Dickey ratio is especially relevant when analytical solutions for the Bayes factor are not available. This is the case for generalized linear models, non-linear models, or cognitive process models with regression extensions. As a remedy, the correct Bayes factor can be computed using a generalized version of the Savage–Dickey density ratio.     

On the current status of the evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics

The evolutionary theory of behavior dynamics is a complexity theory that instantiates the Darwinian principles of selection, reproduction, and mutation in a genetic algorithm. The algorithm is used to animate artificial organisms that behave continuously in time and can be placed in any experimental environment. The present paper is an update on the status of the theory. It includes a summary of the evidence supporting the theory, a list of the theory's untested predictions, and a discussion of how the algorithmic operations of the theory may correspond to material reality. Based on the evidence reviewed here, the evolutionary theory appears to be a strong candidate for a comprehensive theory of adaptive behavior.     

Out-of-bag Prediction Error: A Cross Validation Index for Generalized Structured Component Analysis

Cross validation is a useful way of comparing predictive generalizability of theoretically plausible a priori models in structural equation modeling (SEM). A number of overall or local cross validation indices have been proposed for existing factor-based and component-based approaches to SEM, including covariance structure analysis and partial least squares path modeling. However, there is no such cross validation index available for generalized structured component analysis (GSCA) which is another component-based approach. We thus propose a cross validation index for GSCA, called Out-of-bag Prediction Error (OPE), which estimates the expected prediction error of a model over replications of so-called in-bag and out-of-bag samples constructed through the implementation of the bootstrap method. The calculation of this index is well-suited to the estimation procedure of GSCA, which uses the bootstrap method to obtain the standard errors or confidence intervals of parameter estimates. We empirically evaluate the performance of the proposed index through the analyses of both simulated and real data.     

Why does impression management positively influence interview ratings? The mediating role of competence and warmth

Though interviews assess job applicants' skills and abilities, they can be influenced by extraneous factors, including impression management (IM) tactics. Interviewees’ self‐promotion and ingratiation IM tactics predict higher interview ratings; however, researchers have yet to determine why these tactics work. We assessed whether two fundamental dimensions of social perception, competence and warmth, mediate the relationship between IM tactics and interview ratings. We hypothesized that interviewee competence mediates the relationship between self‐promotion and interview ratings, and interviewee warmth mediates the relationship between ingratiation and interview ratings. Using real employment interviews, we found that competence mediates the relationship between self‐promotion and interview ratings, but warmth did not mediate the relationship between ingratiation and interview ratings in the way we expected.     

Children’s scale errors are a natural consequence of learning to associate objects with actions: A computational model

Young children sometimes attempt an action on an object, which is inappropriate because of the object size—they make scale errors. Existing theories suggest that scale errors may result from immaturities in children's action planning system, which might be overpowered by increased complexity of object representations or developing teleofunctional bias. We used computational modelling to emulate children's learning to associate objects with actions and to select appropriate actions, given object shape and size. A computational Developmental Deep Model of Action and Naming (DDMAN) was built on the dual‐route theory of action selection, in which actions on objects are selected via a direct (nonsemantic or visual) route or an indirect (semantic) route. As in case of children, DDMAN produced scale errors: the number of errors was high at the beginning of training and decreased linearly but did not disappear completely. Inspection of emerging object–action associations revealed that these were coarsely organized by shape, hence leading DDMAN to initially select actions based on shape rather than size. With experience, DDMAN gradually learned to use size in addition to shape when selecting actions. Overall, our simulations demonstrate that children's scale errors are a natural consequence of learning to associate objects with actions.     

Feature selection using Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) and Road Sign Detection and Recognition (RSDR) system

Road Sign Detection and Recognition (RSDR) is aimed to enable drivers maintain basic functionality with the aim of identifying and notifying driver through the existing restrictions so that the process is a success on the present widened road. Examples for RSDR include ‘traffic light ahead’ or ‘pedestrian crossing’ signs. An innovative RSDR system has been introduced which comprises of pre-processing, edge detection, feature extraction, features selection and Ensemble Fuzzy Support Vector Machine (EFSVM) classifier. Feature selection is carried out successfully by deployment of Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) algorithm to determine most prominent and definitive features. These features are then fed into the ensemble SVM to enable both road side traffic detection as well as recognition. Suggested system’s performance is analyzed and evaluated with respect to road signs having a capable recognition rate.     

How Otto did not extend his mind,but might have: Dynamic systems theory and social-cultural group selection

Proponents of cognitive Situationism argue that the human mind is embodied, embedded in both natural and social-cultural environments and extended creating both extended and distributed cognition. Anti-situationists reject all or some of these claims. I argue that four major objections to extended cognition: (1) the mark of the cognitive, (2) the function-identity fallacy, (3) cognitive bloat, and (4) scientific irrelevance lose much of their sting in the case of distributed cognition, the extension of cognitive agency to a group of cognitive agents, such as a scientific research team. However, I claim that a crucial fifth challenge, that advocates of the extended mind commit the causal-constitution fallacy, has yet to be satisfactorily addressed. I focus on Spyridon Palermos’ use of dynamic systems theory to refute this charge and I argue that his appeal to dynamic systems theory as a way of understanding system-constitution fails. Instead, I suggest a social-cultural group selection hypothesis for understanding system-constitution. But, I leave it for another day to elaborate that hypothesis’ empirical plausibility.