期刊文献+

基于多主体仿真的大群体应急决策风险致因分析 被引量:11

Risk-causing Analysis of Large Group Emergency Decision-making Based on Multi-agent Simulation
原文传递
导出
摘要 大群体应急决策风险来源众多,且对决策的影响不容忽视。本文从个体因素和群体因素两方面对大群体应急决策风险进行系统识别,并将各风险因素与两类群体效应(认知冲突和关系冲突)进行关联,建立大群体应急决策风险致因体系。在此基础上,设置由个体认可度、群体结构、沟通方式、决策策略和外部影响组成的仿真变量,然后基于观点动力学利用Netlogo工具建立大群体应急决策风险致因多主体仿真模型,最后通过案例模拟得出各风险因素致因机理的一般规律。仿真结果表明:控制高认可度决策主体的比例,增加聚集间交互,采取必要的预见性措施,对降低决策风险,提高决策共识速度,应对决策环境的高动态性具有积极作用。研究有助于掌握大群体应急决策风险因素的组成及其影响规律,为应急决策的策略引导提供参考和借鉴。 There are many sources of risk in large group emergency decision-making,and their impacts on decision-making cannot be ignored.If these risks cannot be controlled effectively,they will become a new source of risk,further deteriorating the situation,and then may lead to poor rescue performance,or even rescue failure.The risks in large group emergency decision-making are systematically identified from the aspects of individual factors and group factors,and the relationship between each risk factor and two group effects is explored,namely cognitive conflict and relationship conflict,then a large group emergency decision-making risk-causing system is established.On this basis,the simulation variables consisting of individual acceptance,group structure,interaction mode,decision strategy and decision-making environment are set and the multi-agent simulation model of risk-causing for large group emergency decision-making is established based on opinion dynamics by using Netlogo tool.Finally,the general rules of the causal mechanisms of each risk factor are obtained by case simulation.The simulation results show that the fusion and integration of different information and perspectives is the key driving force of risk control for large group emergency decision-making with high complexity and uncertainty.It can effectively control the risk and ensure the efficiency of large group emergency decision-making after establishing the optimal decision-making group,increasing the participation and interaction scope of decision-makers,promoting more comprehensive information sharing,ensuring sufficient and efficient exchange of opinions,forming decision-making consensus with maximum efficiency,and maintaining a high predictability of the dynamics of external impacts in the decision-making environment.Decision conflict is taken as a representation of decision risk,and innovatively the research of large group emergency decision is intensified from the decision conflict direction to the decision risk direction,which is the expansion and integration of large group emergency decision research field,and helpful to grasp the composition of risk factors and their influencing rules in large groups emergency decision-making,and can provide reference and guidance for strategy selection in emergency decision-making.
作者 尹儇鹏 徐选华 陈晓红 YIN Xuan-peng;XU Xuan-hua;CHEN Xiao-hong(School of Business,Central South University,Changsha 410083,China)
机构地区 中南大学商学院
出处 《中国管理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2020年第2期208-219,共12页 Chinese Journal of Management Science
基金 国家自然科学基金资助项目(71671189) 国家自然科学基金重点资助项目(71790615,91846301) 中国科协“高端科技创新智库青年项目”——博士生项目(CXY-ZKQN-2019-016) 中南大学研究生自主探索创新项目(2017zzts045).
关键词 大群体 应急决策 风险致因 多主体仿真 large group emergency decision making risk-causing multi-agent simulation
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献120

  • 1徐选华,陈晓红.基于矢量空间的群体聚类方法研究[J].系统工程与电子技术,2005,27(6):1034-1037. 被引量:42
  • 2陈晓红,刘蓉.改进的聚类算法及在复杂大群体决策中的应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2006,28(11):1695-1699. 被引量:21
  • 3Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215-233.
  • 4Barron, G., & Yechiam, E. (2009). The coexistence of overestimation and underweighting of rare events and the contingent recency effect. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 447-460.
  • 5Camilleri, A. R., & Newell, B. R. (2009a). Within-subject preference reversals in description- and experience-based choice. In N. Taatgen, J. van Rijn, J. Nerbonne, & L. Schomaker (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 449-454). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
  • 6Camilleri, A. R., & Newell, B. R. (2009b). The role of representation in experience-based choice. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(7), 518-529.
  • 7Erev, I., Glozman, I., & Hertwig, R. (2008). What impacts the impact of rare events. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36. 153-177.
  • 8Fox, C. R., & Hadar, L. (2006). "Decisions from experience"=sampling error + prospect theory: Reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev (2004). Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 159-161.
  • 9Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1998). A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Science, 44, 879-895.
  • 10Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704.

共引文献106

同被引文献175

引证文献11

二级引证文献50

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部