Kishk, M; Pollock, R and Okhuahesogie, E (2004) Sensitivity of simulated whole-life costs to input probability distributions. In: Khosrowshahi, F (ed.) Proceedings of 20th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2004, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
In a typical Monte Carlo simulation (MCS), it is required to assign probability distribution functions (PDFs) for uncertain parameters. Due to lack of or irrelevance of historical whole-life costing (WLC) data, these functions are usually assumed. The research work that underpins this paper aimed to identify the significance of errors in various input parameters in a WLC exercise and to identify critical parameters in assigning a probability distribution. In carrying out the study, a number of case studies have been identified and analysed using a risk assessment software. Besides, a number of metrics to assess the impact have been identified and employed. Typical results show that varying the type and range of input PDFs only affect the certainty level of simulated WLC results while variations in the standard deviation affected the risk ranking of uncertain input variables. The most significant impact was that due to variations in the mean of input PDFs, which does not only affect the certainty of the decision, but can even change the decision altogether.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | decision-making; Monte Carlo simulation; probability distributions; sensitivity analysis; whole-life costing |
| Index terms: | variation, exercise, probability distribution, risk assessment, sensitivity analysis, case study, decision-making, deviation, Monte Carlo simulation, whole-life costing |
| Subjects: | financial risk, environmental hazards, occupational health, modelling and simulation, statistical analysis, financial and cost management, decision analysis, health behaviours and lifestyles, contractual condition, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Contract Administration, Cost Management, Research Practice, Risk Management, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here