Decision aiding tool

• US 20030229527A1
• Filed: 04/10/2003
• Published: 12/11/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 04/18/2002
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Qinetiq Limited (QinetiQ Group PLC)
• Original Assignee: Qinetiq Limited (QinetiQ Group PLC)
• Inventors: Fletcher, Stephen Michael, Horton, Averil Myvanwy, Humphreys, Elizabeth Jane
• Application Number:
  US10/411,449
• Publication Number:
  US 20030229527A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/7
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management

Abstract

A decision aiding tool uses quantifiable and knowable information as a proxy for generally unknowable information in order to provide basis for assessment of potential for achieving a goal. The knowable (non-specialist) information is linked to the goal to be assessed and to the unknowable (specialist) information via a decision tree. This is incorporated in a software toolkit for conversion of non-specialist information, elicited from a user, into specialist information. The toolkit presents to the user a series of Proxy Questions, each relating to aspects of the knowable information, and a number of possible Statements which may be selected in response. Each selected Statement is then quantified to provide a score and, with appropriate weighting, the scores are aggregated in accordance with the structure of the decision tree. This provides quantitative indicators of the unknowable information and of the potential for achieving the goal.

Claims

1. A method of decision tree analysis by which a goal (82) to be assessed in terms of a comparison between a number of different scenarios is linked with quantifiable parameters (101-112), thereby enabling a quantitative value to be obtained as a measure of the goal (82), the method comprising the steps of:

(a) At a first level of the decision tree, associating the goal (82) with Required Information (84) which, if all aspects of the Required Information (84) were known, would enable a straightforward assessment of the goal (82) to be made for each of the different scenarios;

(b) At a second level of the decision tree, linking proxy information (86) to the Required Information (84) wherein the proxy information (86) comprises a number of aspects, each of which is a generally estimable parameter, and each aspect of the proxy information (86) is assumed to make a contribution to each aspect of the Required Information (84); and

(c) At a third and, possibly, subsequent level of the decision tree, extracting Proxy Factors (101-112), the Proxy Factors (101-112) being not insignificant components of each aspect of the proxy information (86) linked to one of the aspects of the Required Information through the decision tree structure and wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) are quantifiable parameters.

2. A method according to claim 1 wherein the method further comprises the steps of:

(a) Obtaining quantities (score_n) representative of the Proxy Factors (101-112), and

(b) For at least one of;

each aspect of Required Information (84),

each aspect of proxy information (86), and

the overall goal (82),

generating a Result for comparison between the different scenarios wherein each respective Result is generated by aggregating and normalising the representative quantities (score_n) in accordance with links established by the decision tree structure.

3. A method according to claim 2 wherein the representative quantities of step (a) are obtained by the steps of:

(a) Presenting to a user a series of predetermined Proxy Questions (PQ_n), wherein each Proxy Question relates to a Proxy Factor (101-112),

(b) Prompting the user to select, for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), one of a number of predetermined Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n)), each Proxy Statement being a relevant answer to its respective Proxy Question (PQ_n), and,

(c) On selection by the user of one Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), multiplying a predetermined Assigned Value (AV(nm)) for the Proxy Statement (PS(nm)), the Assigned Value being a numerical representation of the benefit of the selected Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) to the goal (82) relative to the benefit of all the unselected Statements corresponding to the same Proxy Question (PQ_n), by a predetermined weighting (w_n) for the Proxy Question (PQ_n), the weighting being a numerical representation of the magnitude of the effect on the goal (82) of the Proxy Factor (101-112) corresponding to the Proxy Question (PQ_n), and to generate the Result (score_n).

4. The method according to claim 1, 2 or 3 wherein the goal (82) to be assessed is the commercial potential of new technology, the Required Information comprises three aspects relating to Income, Costs and Risks, the proxy information comprises three aspects relating to Product, Market and Barriers, and the Proxy Factors (101-112) are Proxy Exploitation Factors.

5. A method according to claim 4 wherein the Proxy Exploitation Factors (101-112) relate to at least three of:

Product or Process Benefits, Sector Attractiveness, Competition and Gross Market Size.

6. A method according to claim 5 wherein the Proxy Exploitation Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

External Barriers, Exploitation Timescale, Technology Content and Technology Status.

7. A method according to claim 6 wherein the Proxy Exploitation Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

Internal Barriers, Technology Level, Third Parties and Intellectual Property.

8. A method of generating a quantitative value representative of potential for achieving a goal (82), the method comprising the steps of:

(a) presenting (50) to a user a series of predetermined Proxy Questions (PQ_n) and, for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), a set of Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n));

wherein each Proxy Question (PQ_n) has a predetermined associated Weighting value (w_n) and each Proxy Statement (PS_n,m(n)) has a pre-determined associated Assigned Value (AV_n,m(n));

(b) accepting (54) a Response comprising a selected set of Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) from the user;

(c) replacing (56) each Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) within the Response with its associated Assigned Value (AV(nm));

(d) multiplying (58) each Assigned Value (AV(nm)) by the Weighting value (w_n) associated with the Proxy Question (PQ_n) which prompted for its associated Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) to obtain a set of score indicators (score_n);

(e) aggregating (60) predetermined combinations of score indicators (score_n) together to obtain a selection of result indicators; and

(f) displaying (66) the result indicators to the user.

9. A method according to claim 8 wherein the weightings (w_n) are predetermined in accordance with an estimated effect of a Proxy Factor (101-112), associated with each Proxy Question (PQ_n), on achieving the goal (82) and the Assigned Values (AV_n,m(n)) are predetermined in accordance with an estimated benefit of the associated Proxy Statement (PS_n,m(n)), relative to estimated benefits of Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n)) within the same set, to the goal (82).

10. A method according to claim 9 wherein the combinations of score indicators (score_n) which are aggregated together at Step (e) to obtain a selection of result indicators are predetermined in accordance with a decision tree structure, the decision tree being established by a method comprising the steps of:

(a) At a first level of the decision tree, associating the goal (82) with Required Information (84) which, if all aspects of the Required Information (84) were known, would enable a straightforward assessment of the goal (82) to be made for each of the different scenarios,

(b) At a second level of the decision tree, linking proxy information (86) to the Required Information (84) wherein the proxy information (86) comprises a number of aspects, each of which is a generally estimable parameter, and each aspect of the proxy information (86) is assumed to make a contribution to each aspect of the Required Information (84), and

(c) At a third and, possibly, subsequent level of the decision tree, extracting the Proxy Factors (101-112), the Proxy Factors (101-112) being not insignificant components of each aspect of the proxy information (86) linked to one of the aspects of the Required Information through the decision tree structure and wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) are quantifiable parameters;

and whereby the combinations of score indicators (score_n) are aggregated in accordance with the links between the Proxy Factors (101-112) corresponding via the Proxy Questions (PQ_n) to the Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) selected and at least one aspect of Required Information (84), proxy information (86) or the overall goal (82), wherein the links are followed backwards through the decision tree structure to provide the result indicator which is therefore a measure of the particular aspect selected, in a scenario for which the user-selected Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) apply.

11. The method according to claim 10 wherein the goal (82) is commercialisation of new technology, and the Proxy Questions (PQ_n) are designed to elicit responses appropriate for the assessment of the Proxy Factors (101-112), which in turn are components of three aspects of proxy information (86) relating to Product, Market and Barriers for or to the commercial exploitation of the new technology, and the Required Information relates to Income, Costs and Risks involved with exploiting the new technology.

12. The method according to claim 11 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) relate to at least three of:

Product or Process Benefits, Sector Attractiveness, Competition and Gross Market Size.

13. The method according to claim 12 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

External Barriers, Exploitation Timescale Technology Content and Technology Status.

14. The method according to claim 13 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

Internal Barriers, Technology Level, Third Parties and Intellectual Property

15. A computer system (10) configured to provide scores for the purpose of assessing competing demands on resources, the system comprising:

memory means (16, 18, 20, 22) for storing data comprising Proxy Questions (PQ_n), weightings (w_n) for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n)) and Assigned Values (AV_n,m(n)) associated with the Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n)),

a display means arranged to display the Proxy Questions (PQ_n) and, for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), a set of Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n)) in a format to prompt the user to select one Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) from the set,

input means arranged to accept inputs from the user, the inputs being characteristic of the Proxy Statements (PS(nm)),

interface means (12) arranged to provide communication between the display means, input means and the rest of the computer (10),

a processor (14), the processor (14) being responsive to the inputs characteristic of the Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) selected to determine a series of scores relating to this combination of Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) and to output the series of scores or a subset thereof via the interface (12) for display by the display means, wherein

the Proxy Questions (PQ_n) are associated with respective Proxy Factors (101-112) in such a way that an answer (PS_n,m(n)) to the Question (PQ_n) is informative as to an impact of the associated Proxy Factor (101-112),

the Proxy Factors (101-112) are derived from a decision tree structure, in which linkages are provided between the Proxy Factors (101-112) and aspects of proxy information (86) and between the aspects of proxy information (86) and aspects of Required Information (84), the Required Information being that which, if known, would permit a straightforward assessment of the competing demands to be made, and

the proxy information (86) comprises parameters which are more readily estimable than the aspects of the Required Information (84).

16. A computer system according to claim 15 wherein the processor 14 further includes

scoring means (26) for calculating a series of score indicators (score_n), one for each user-selected Proxy Statement (PS(nm)), wherein each score indicator (score_n) is calculated by multiplying the Assigned Value (AV(nm)) associated with that user-selected Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) by the weighting (w_n) for the Proxy Question (PQ_n) which elicited input of that user-selected Proxy Statement (PS(nm)), whereby each score indictor (score_n) can be considered a measure of the contribution of the associated Proxy Factor (101-112) to the overall assessment being made, and

a decision tree module (28) arranged to aggregate combinations of score indicators (score_n), each such combination corresponding to linkages in the decision tree structure between one aspect of Required Information (84), one aspect of proxy information (86) or the whole tree and the Proxy Factor(s) (101-112), thereby providing quantitative values which can be used to assess the competing demands of different scenarios with different sets of user-selected Proxy Statements (PS(nm)).

17. A computer system according to claim 16 wherein the demand to be assessed is based on the commercial potential of new technology, and the Proxy Questions (PQ_n) are designed to elicit responses appropriate for the assessment of the Proxy Factors (101-112), which in turn are components of three aspects of proxy information (86) related to Product, Market and Barriers for or to the commercial exploitation of the new technology, and the Required Information relates to Income, Costs and Risks involved with exploiting the new technology.

18. A computer system according to claim 17 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) relate to at least three of:

Product or Process Benefits, Sector Attractiveness, Competition and Gross Market Size.

19. A computer system according to claim 18 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

External Barriers, Exploitation Timescale, Technology Content and Technology Status.

20. A computer system according to claim 19 wherein the Proxy Factors (101-112) further relate to at least one of:

Internal Barriers, Technology Level, Third Parties and Intellectual Property.

21. A computer-readable medium embodying instructions for execution by a processor, the computer-readable medium comprising:

(a) Program code for presenting (50) to a user a series of predetermined Proxy Questions (PQ_n) and, for each Proxy Question (PQ_n), a set of Proxy Statements (PS_n,m(n));

wherein each Proxy Question (PQ_n) has a predetermined associated normalised Weighting value (w_n) and each Proxy Statement (PS_n,m(n)) has a pre-determined associated Assigned Value (AV_n,m(n));

(b) Program code for accepting (54) a Response comprising a selected set of Proxy Statements (PS(nm)) from the user;

(c) Program code for replacing (56) each Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) within the Response with its associated Assigned Value (AV(nm));

(d) Program code for multiplying (58) each Assigned Value (AV(nm)) by the Weighting value (w_n) associated with the Proxy Question (PQ_n) which prompted for its associated Proxy Statement (PS(nm)) to obtain a set of score indicators (score_n);

(e) Program code for aggregating (60) predetermined combinations of score indicators (score_n) together to obtain a selection of result indicators; and

(f) Program code for displaying (66) the result indicators to the user.