Incorporating deeply uncertain factors into the many objective search process

Watson, Abigail; Kasprzyk, J. R.

doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.12.001

Cited by 67 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to recent applications of many‐objective evolutionary algorithms to water resources system planning (Trindade et al, ; Watson & Kasprzyk, ) based on concepts from robust optimization (Hamarat et al, ; Mortazavi‐Naeini et al, ), this step directly embeds a range of uncertain factors in the simulation–optimization process. Embedding uncertain factors in the decision search aims to generate water resources management plans that are robust to a range of future scenarios much wider than the one considered in step 2.…”

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk, Robustness and Water Resources Planning Under Uncertainty

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk‐based water resources planning is based on the premise that water managers should invest up to the point where the marginal benefit of risk reduction equals the marginal cost of achieving that benefit. However, this cost‐benefit approach may not guarantee robustness under uncertain future conditions, for instance under climatic changes. In this paper, we expand risk‐based decision analysis to explore possible ways of enhancing robustness in engineered water resources systems under different risk attitudes. Risk is measured as the expected annual cost of water use restrictions, while robustness is interpreted in the decision‐theoretic sense as the ability of a water resource system to maintain performance—expressed as a tolerable risk of water use restrictions—under a wide range of possible future conditions. Linking risk attitudes with robustness allows stakeholders to explicitly trade‐off incremental increases in robustness with investment costs for a given level of risk. We illustrate the framework through a case study of London's water supply system using state‐of‐the ‐art regional climate simulations to inform the estimation of risk and robustness.

show abstract

Section: The Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk, Robustness and Water Resources Planning Under Uncertainty

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous applications of MOEAs in water resources have emerged in recent years (Ahmadi et al, 2014;Giuliani et al, 2014;Giuliani, Anghileri, et al, 2016a;Herman et al, 2014;Kasprzyk et al, 2013;Mortazavi-Naeini et al, 2014;Smith et al, 2016;Watson & Kasprzyk, 2017;W. Wu et al, 2016), several of which demonstrate the conflicting objectives of competing stakeholders.…”

Section: Approaches For Managing Transboundary Water Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Herman et al (2015) describe a practical approach to measuring robustness as calculating the fraction of scenarios in which the solution satisfies one or more of the performance thresholds. Decisions can also be sought by considering a wider range of uncertainties initially and the cost of doing so evaluated ex post facto (Giuliani, Anghileri, et al, 2016a;Watson & Kasprzyk, 2017).…”

Section: Water Resources Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous applications of MOEAs in water resources have emerged in recent years (Ahmadi et al, ; Giuliani et al, ; Giuliani, Anghileri, et al, ; Herman et al, ; Kasprzyk et al, ; Mortazavi‐Naeini et al, ; Smith et al, ; Watson & Kasprzyk, ; W. Wu et al, ), several of which demonstrate the conflicting objectives of competing stakeholders. Maier et al () argue that the primary focus of MOEA research has been on improving the algorithms and note the lack of applications to real‐world problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring Cooperative Transboundary River Management Strategies for the Eastern Nile Basin

Wheeler

Hall

Abdo

et al. 2018

Water Resources Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A water resource modeling process is demonstrated to support multistakeholder negotiations over transboundary management of the Nile River. This process addresses the challenge of identifying management options of new hydraulic infrastructure that potentially affects downstream coriparian nations and how the management of existing infrastructure can be adapted. The method includes an exploration of potential management decisions using a multiobjective evolutionary algorithm, intertwined with an iterative process of formulating cooperative strategies to overcome technical and political barriers faced in a transboundary negotiation. The case study is the addition of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and considers how its operation may be coordinated with adaptations to the operations of Egypt's High Aswan Dam. The results demonstrate that a lack of coordination is likely to be harmful to downstream riparians and suggest that adaptations to infrastructure in Sudan and Egypt can reduce risks to water supplies and energy generation. Although risks can be substantially reduced by agreed releases from the GERD and basic adaptations to the High Aswan Dam, these measures are still insufficient to assure that no additional risk is assumed by Egypt. The method then demonstrates how improvements to water security for both downstream riparians can be achieved through dynamic adaptation of the operation of the GERD during drought conditions. Finally, the paper demonstrates how the robustness of potential management arrangements can be evaluated considering potential effects of climate change, including increased interannual variability and highly uncertain changes such as increases in the future persistence of droughts.

show abstract

“…There is a growing literature on robust decision frameworks that aim to support decision‐makers through model‐based large scale scenario analysis (Hamarat, Kwakkel, & Pruyt, ; Herman, Reed, Zeff, & Characklis, ; Kasprzyk, Nataraj, Reed, & Lempert, ; Kwakkel & Haasnoot, ; Kwakkel, Haasnoot, & Walker, ; Lempert, ; Lempert, Groves, Popper, & Bankes, ; Walker, Lempert, & Kwakkel, ; Watson & Kasprzyk, ). These frameworks rely on iterative stress testing (Swart et al, ) of candidate strategies to develop flexible strategies that produce satisfying outcome across a large ensemble of scenarios.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A generalized many‐objective optimization approach for scenario discovery

Kwakkel

2019

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scenario discovery is a model‐based approach for scenario development, aimed at finding one or more subspaces within the uncertainty space associated with a model that is decision‐relevant. These identified subspaces can subsequently be translated into narratives or shared in other ways a broader participatory process. Finding such as subspace involves solving a three‐objective optimization problem. A subspace should cover many of the decision relevant model runs, while containing as few as possible nondecision relevant model runs, and being easy to interpret. Existing techniques for scenario discovery, however, focus only on finding a subspace that minimizes the number of nondecision relevant model runs. Adopting a single objective optimization approach for a many‐objective optimization problem implies that the full trade‐off space is not identified. In this paper, we introduce a many‐objective optimization approach for scenario discovery. We compare this with an improved usage of Patient Rule Induction Method (PRIM) for identifying the multidimensional trade‐offs amongst coverage, density, and interpretability. We find that the many‐objective optimization approach produces results which slightly dominate those of the improved version of PRIM on all three objectives. Qualitatively, however, both approaches identify essentially the same subspaces. The prime benefits of the many‐objective optimization approach are its potential in bringing additional scenario relevant concerns such as consistency or diversity into the scenario discovery framework, as well as its ability to avoid overfitting. Potentially more important, it also paves the way for future work on using more sophisticated metaheuristic optimization approaches for scenario discovery.

show abstract

Incorporating deeply uncertain factors into the many objective search process

Cited by 67 publications

References 60 publications

Risk, Robustness and Water Resources Planning Under Uncertainty

Risk, Robustness and Water Resources Planning Under Uncertainty

Exploring Cooperative Transboundary River Management Strategies for the Eastern Nile Basin

A generalized many‐objective optimization approach for scenario discovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About