Universidad Nacional Abierta y a Distancia

Academic and Research Vice-rector

Activities guide and evaluation rubric
Phase 4 - Solve problems by applying the algorithms of Unit 2

1. General description of the course

Faculty or Academic School of Basic Sciences, Technology and Engineering

Unit
Academic Level Professional
Academic Field Disciplinary training
Course Name Theory of decisions
Course Code 212066
Course Type Theoretical Can be yes ☒ No ☐
enabled
Number of Credits 3

2. Description of the activity

Type of the Number of

Individual ☐ Collaborative ☒ 3
activity: weeks
Moment of Unit
Initial ☐ ☒ Final ☐
evaluation: Intermediate:
Evaluative score of the activity: Delivery Environment of the activity:
75 points Collaborative learning
Starting date of the activity: Deadline of the activity: Wednesday, October
Thursday, October 04, 2018 24, 2018

Competence to develop:

Differentiate the algorithms, their characteristics and application in different risk

environments and/or uncertainty, for the taking of decisions and the optimization of the
expected results.

Topics to develop:

The academic course consists of three (3) academic credits, whose field of training is the
discipline and has a professional nature- elective in the program of industrial engineering
that offer the UNAD; in addition, it is theoretical. After you understand and internalize the
knowledge of the three preliminary courses of operations research (linear programming
methods deterministic, probabilistic methods) and the support in the acquired knowledge
in statistics and probability and Statistical Inference, the student is able to start the course
of decision theory, where it seeks to understand the methods, operations and definitions
on the different techniques of application in the decisions that depend on the type and
quality of the information obtained.

Steps, phases of the learning strategy to develop

Phases and stages of the learning strategy to be developed:

Phase 4. Solve problems by applying the algorithms of Unit 2, taking into account the
following steps:
Stage 12. Individual activity: Individual review of the activity guide and bibliographical
references required and complementary for the development of the activity.

Group activities:

Stage 13. Discussion and analysis of the problems raised, revision of the algorithms to
be applied and development of the activities proposed in the Collaborative Learning
Environment.

Note: Collaborative activities must be developed individually to meet all the problems
solved, the team discusses, corrects, consolidates and presents the contributions of all
the participants in the activity. To divide among the members of the collaborative groups
the proposed problems is not a methodology of the course, as the qualification will be
done according to the contributions presented individually.

Stage 14. Development of practical activities, use of Excel Solver. Review of the guides
in the Practical Learning Environment

Stage 15. Individual e-portfolio solving in the evaluation and monitoring environment.

Stage 16. Consolidation of the final work and rise in the Evaluation and Monitoring
Environment.

Activities to develop

Phase 4. Decisions under a risk environment, Unit 2.

Stage 12. Individual activity: With the reading and analysis of the problem contained in
the integrated guide of activities which is in the Collaborative Learning Environment, the
scenarios are reviewed, preparing to discuss the solution of the problem.

Do not forget to gather the necessary information to learn new concepts, principles and
skills that will help you in the process. In the Collaborative Work forum and in the
discussion topic called Phase 4. Collaborative work 2, start the activity by calling
colleagues, identifying the roles and pointing out the one you will assume.

Stage 13. The team should use the knowledge they already have, the details of the
problems that are proposed and that will be discussed for its subsequent resolution. It
outlines the possible algorithms that will need to solve each of the decision problems
under risk environment. Generate a list of response methods group, then solve them
according to the following indications of the problem:

Problem 1. Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage criteria

(Profit Matrix):

In the company ABC several alternatives are presented to choose the best technology of
four possible, whose performance depends on the adaptation of the workers who will
manipulate the equipments that comprise it. The expected benefits of each alternative
and degree of adaptation of the workers are given in the table, in millions of pesos ($).
For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of 0,6.
 Event

Fits Fits Fits very

Alternative Does not fit Fits well
acceptably successfully well

Technology 1 1140 1185 1230 1290 1335

Technology 2 1350 1260 1260 1245 1200

Technology 3 1200 1275 1320 1350 1380

Technology 4 1365 1320 1305 1290 1275

Technology 5 1335 1320 1335 1365 1410

Table 1. Profit matrix

Problem 2. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and

Savage (Cost matrix):

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its customers in the day of love and
friendship. The exact number of crates is not known, but is expected to fall into one of
five categories: 510, 620, 650, 710 and 730 crates. There are therefore four levels of
supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs,
either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of
0,65.

Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1571 1620 2065 2201 2561
e2(720) 1515 1859 2005 2192 2645
e3(750) 1554 1669 2115 2217 2406
e4(790) 1370 1809 2062 2295 2374
e5(830) 1451 1867 2100 2250 2473
Table 2. Cost matrix

Problem 3. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and

Savage (Cost matrix):

A warehouse of finished products that leases its services to imports from the USA, must
plan its level of supply to satisfy the demand of its customers in the day of love and
friendship. The exact number of crates is not known, but is expected to fall into one of
five categories: 580, 720, 750, 790 and 830 crates. There are therefore four levels of
supply. The deviation from the number of hoppers is expected to result in additional costs,
either due to excessive supplies or because demand can not be met. The table below
shows the costs in hundreds of dollars (US $). For Hurwicz please assume an alpha of
0,55.
 Event
e1(580) e2(720) e3(750) e4(790) e5(830)
Alternative
e1(580) 1144 982 1019 1032 1069
e2(720) 1175 1019 857 1019 1057
e3(750) 1069 1138 1044 1094 1182
e4(790) 1019 932 1200 1032 932
e5(830) 1007 1032 894 1188 1200

Table 3. Cost matrix

Problem 4. Game Theory method:

Graphical solutions are only applicable to games in which at least one of the players has
only two strategies. Consider the following 2 x n game:

Player 2
Strategy
A B C
Player I 25 33 29
1 II 32 27 29

Table 4. Theory of games 2 x n

Problem 5. Game Theory method:

Graphical solutions are only applicable to games in which at least one of the players has
only two strategies. Consider the following game m x 2:
Player 2
Strategy
A B
I 23 31
Player 1 II 29 25
II 26 29

Table 5. Game Theory m x 2

Problem 6. Optimum solution of two-person games:

The games represent the latest case of lack of information where intelligent opponents
are working in a conflicting environment. The result is that a very conservative criterion
is generally proposed to solve sets of two people and sum zero, called minimax - maximin
criterion. To determine a fair game, the minimax = maximin, it is necessary to solve the
stable strategy through the Solver.

Table 6. Mixed strategies

PROPOSED STRATEGY

PART 5. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage

(Matrix of benefits):

According to Table 1 by applying the criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic

criteria, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal decision level according to the benefit
criteria.

PART 6. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage

(Cost matrix):

According to Table 2 by applying the criteria of criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic,

optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal decision level according to the
criteria of costs.

PART 7. Criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic, optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage

(Cost matrix):

According to Table 3 by applying the criteria of criteria of Laplace, Wald or pessimistic,

optimistic, Hurwicz and Savage determine the optimal decision level according to the
criteria of costs.

PART 8. Game Theory Graphic Method:

According to Table 4 find the value of the game by means of the graphical method applied
to matrices 2 x n or m x 2.

PART 9. Game Theory Graphic Method:

According to Table 5, find the value of the game by means of the graphical method applied
to matrices 2 x n or m x 2.

PART 10. Theory of games, mixed strategies:

Solve the game of players A and B to determine the value of the game, using the proposed
Excel tool, according to the data in table 6.

PART 11. PRACTICAL WORK ENVIRONMENT.

Step 14. Enter the Practical Environment, in this space videos are presented for the use
of the WinQSB or the Excel Solver Plug-in and practical tutorials to develop the proposed
activities, remember to attach screenshots to your final collaborative work, the income
and results table for the problems raised. In this same space you can carefully review the
Guide for the use of educational resources.

PART 12. USE OF E-PORTFOLIO

Stage 15. Individually fill out the e-portfolio journal, so that it can verify the recording of
its difficulties and strengths with the activity of the practical environment, recognizing the
contribution for its professional life the use of the algorithms of the course, the which is
in the Evaluation and follow-up environment, to record what is identified in the e-portfolio
in the conclusions of the collaborative work that is found in the Collaborative Learning
environment and thus consolidate the definitive group work.

PART 13. RISE OF COLLABORATIVE WORK

Step 16. The leader of the group should upload a single PDF file in the Evaluation and
Monitoring Environment, in the designated space called Phase 4. Collaborative Work 2.

Environment
Collaborative learning environment - Evaluation and monitoring
for the
environment
development
Individual:
None in this activity.

Collaborative:

Expected Product: PDF file marked with its Working

Group_212066_TC2, in letter Arial 12 and APA standards, with the
following content:
Products to
Page 1. Cover with the members who participated actively in the
deliver by
consolidation and generation of collaborative work.
student
Page 2. Introduction.
Page 3 and successive. Exercises solved according to the proposed
theme.
Following pages. Screen shots solution exercises with the WinQSB
or Solver that performed in the practical learning environment.
Next page. Conclusions with what is stated in the e-portfolio.
Final page. Bibliography according to APA standards that supports
the solution of problems.

General guidelines for the collaborative work

Distance learning and in virtual learning environments

requires a solid planning process against suggested activities
for students. In this sense, when working on elements that
require the joint participation of the members of the group,
the need arises to articulate the learning strategy based on
Problems SBP and to direct it to facilitate the process of
student training. This approach emphasizes self-learning and
self-training, which are facilitated by the dynamics of the
Planning of activities approach and its eclectic constructivist conception.
for the development of
collaborative work In the ABP approach, cognitive autonomy is fostered, taught
and learned from problems that have meaning for students,
error is used as an opportunity to learn rather than punish
and an important value is given to the self-evaluation and
formative, qualitative and individualized evaluation. The
resources needed to solve the problems are in the Knowledge
Environment. Whenever you have considered these aspects
you can then begin to develop the phases corresponding to
the individual and collaborative work of the course.
 Recognition of actors as subjects:

The students at the beginning of the course, in the space

destined to do so, will be recognized as participants of a
collaborative group, they will be able to present their
strengths to the service of the group and they will define the
channels of communication (contact data, institutional and
personal email address, skype , social networking links.) of
which will be available to interact effectively and proactively.

Planning of academic activities:

According to the elements that make up the principle of

responsible action, students must design a work plan based
on the analytical reflection of the activity agenda, the
evaluation plan, the guides and rubrics given for the
development of each academic activity . They will also design
a proposal for the planning of their collaborative work that
responds to the particularities and needs of the learning
strategy and mobilizes the work to be developed.

Staging of the principles of collaborative work:

It is important that students internalize each of the principles

of collaborative work and implement them from the beginning
Roles to perform by of the academic year and thereby ensure excellence in their
the student in the learning processes and the presentation of academic products
collaborative group that meet the expected quality in the course.

Principle of Interaction. In the perspective of the student,

this principle materializes when defining the ways and
mechanisms that will enable interaction in collaborative work.
The intention is for students to participate in the different
spaces of Collaborative Work and the general forum of the
Initial Environment to allow efficient interaction between
them.

Principle of growth. Each student can contribute to the

process of the other peers. From this idea, in the same
scenario where interactions occur, students can contribute to
others in terms of suggesting greater participation to those
who do not intervene frequently, offering information search
strategies, proposing technological resources that support
the process being carried out, among others that allow the
team to advance and that each one can strengthen its
formative process.

Principle of Responsible Action. Students should organize

their work to achieve the goals set. It is important that each
one assumes actions in the development of the work that
contribute in the achievement of good results of the
equipment. The aim is to ensure that the organization of
responsibilities, the definition of roadmaps in the
 development of work and the coordination of individual
efforts, allow a successful collaborative exercise. It is also
important to consider aspects of evaluation in the student's
exercise, through the following scenarios:

Self-evaluation and Co-evaluation. It is the process in

which the student, through an instrument designed (Survey)
recognizes and presents its strengths and difficulties in the
development of collaborative work. A score has not been
assigned on this process, but it is a formative activity that
allows the student to identify the aspects that allow him / her
to progress in his / her formative process based on the
difficulties identified during the development of the activities,
their individual participation and their interaction with the
group.

Compiler: Consolidate the document that constitutes the

final product of the debate, taking into account that the
contributions of all the participants have been included and
that only the participants who participated in the process are
included. You must inform the person in charge of the alerts
to warn those who did not participate, that they will not be
included in the product to be delivered.

Reviewer: Ensure that the writing complies with the rules of

submission of work required by the teacher.

Evaluator: Ensure that the document contains the criteria

Roles and
present in the rubric. You must inform the person in charge
responsibility for the
of the alerts so that you inform the other members of the
delivery of products by
team in case any adjustments need to be made on the
students
subject.

Deliveries: Alert on the delivery times of the products and

send the document in the stipulated times, using the
resources destined for the shipment, and indicate to the other
partners that the delivery has been made.

Alerts: Ensure that the members of the group are notified of

new developments and inform the teacher through the work
forum and messaging of the course, which has been sent the
document.

Joyce, J. (1999). The Foundations of Causal Decision Theory.

Camdridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Editorial.
Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct
Use of references =true&db=nlebk&AN=228167&lang=es&site=eds-live

Prisner, E. (2014). Game Theory. Washington, District of

Columbia, USA: Mathematical Association of America
Editorial. Retrieved from:
 http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct
=true&db=nlebk&AN=800654&lang=es&site=eds-live

Owen, G. (2013). Game Theory: Monterey, California, USA:

Naval Postgraduate School Editorial. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2048/login?url=http://s
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN
=525603&lang=es&site=ehost-live

Abdi, M. (2003). A design strategy for reconfigurable

manufacturing systems (RMSs) using analytical hierarchical
process (AHP): a case study: Manchester, UK: International
Journal of Production Research. Retrieved from:
http://bibliotecavirtual.unad.edu.co:2051/login.aspx?direct
=true&db=buh&AN=10149095&lang=es&site=eds-live

In the agreement 029 of December 13, 2013, article 99, the

mistakes that infringe upon the academic order, among
others, are the following: paragraph e) “To plagiarize is to
present as your own work the whole or part of a writing,
report, task or document of invention performed by another
person. It also implies the use of cites or lack of references,
or includes cites where there is no coincidence between them
and the reference” and paragraph f)”To reproduce, or copy
for profit, educational resources or results of research
products, which have intellectual rights reserved for the
Plagiarism policy
University”.

The academic punishments that the student will face are:

a. In case of academic fraud proved in the academic work

or evaluation, the score achieved will be zero (0.0)
without leading to disciplinary measures.
b. In case of plagiarism proved in the academic work of
any nature, the score achieved will be zero (0.0),
without leading to disciplinary measures.
 4. Evaluation rubric

Rubric evaluation format

Phase 4 - Solve problems by applying the algorithms of Unit 2
Type of
Individual activity Collaborative activity X
activity
Moment of
Initial Intermediate, unit 2 X Final
Evaluation
Performance Criteria for Individual Activity
Aspects Score
High rating Average rating Low rating
evaluated
The student Participation in the
The student participated in the effective
Individual participated actively forum, but his elaboration of the
student and effectively in the contributions are work is limited, so
8
participation elaboration of the fairly effective in the the achievement of
in the forum requested product. creation of the final the objectives is
product. inadequate.
Until 8 points Until 4 points Until 0 points
Performance Criteria for Collaborative Activity
Score
Aspects
High rating Average rating Low rating
evaluated

Although the
document presents a
The document basic structure, it
The basic norms for
presents an lacks some elements
the construction of
excellent structure, of the requested
reports are
all the exercises are body or does not
nonexistent like the
Structure of solved according to comply with the
algorithms applied 7
the Report the proposed norms for written
to the themes of
methodology and works. Not all
the theory of
algorithms of the problems are solved
decisions.
theory of decisions. according to the
algorithms of the
course.

Until 7 points Until 4 points Until 0 points

 Although the subject
The objectives of the
matter is treated,
work were
the body of the
satisfactorily The document
document does not
fulfilled, the leaves unresolved
adequately solve the
Algorithms of algorithms of the algorithms of
situation, the
Laplace, Wald, Laplace, Wald, etc. conclusions are not
Laplace, Wald, etc.,
10
etc. are solved correctly for which the
pertinent according
and the analysis of optimality decisions
to the results
their results leads to are left unanswered.
obtained by the
an optimal decision-
algorithms of
making.
Laplace, Wald, etc.
Until 10 points Until 5 points Until 0 points
The document
The objectives of the leaves unresolved
Although the theme
work were fulfilled graphical methods
is treated in a partial
satisfactorily and the according to game
way, the value of
analysis of the theory, so that the
Game theory the game and its 10
results leads to an decisions and value
decisions are not
optimal decision- of the game have
defined correctly.
making. not been
determined.
Until 10 points Until 5 points Until 0 points
Although the theme
The objectives of
is treated in a The paper leaves
the work were
partial way, the unresolved game
satisfactorily
Mixed value of the game, theory according to
fulfilled, the value
strategies according to the mixed strategies, so 10
of the game and the
mixed strategies did a correct decision is
decisions were
not lead to a correct not obtained.
correct.
decision making.
Until 10 points Until 5 points Until 0 points
There are no
Writing is excellent,
spelling errors, but The document
ideas are
Writing and the document presents
correlated, and the
spelling presents a medium deficiencies in
body of the text is 8
articulation of the writing and spelling
coherent in its
ideas and structure errors.
entirety.
of paragraphs.
Until 8 points Until 4 points Until 0 points
 Although references
are presented in the
The references used
final report, they The use of citations
to solve the
are not adequately and references
problems are
articulated with the proposed in the
adequate, as they
References work, since they do syllabus and the 8
lead to the solution
not lead to the integrated guide to
and analysis of the
solution and activities.
problems proposed.
analysis of the
problems proposed.

Until 8 points Until 4 points Until 0 points

Although the use of
The practical
The use of the the practical
environment of the
practical environment in the
course has been no
environment of the final report is
longer explored, for
Use of the course is excellent, evident, the
that reason the
practical the results and the solutions found by
evidence in the use 14
learning analysis of these the application lack
of the application to
environment are shown correctly analysis and
solve the problems
in the final work conclusions
raised has been
presented. pertinent to efficient
limited.
decision making.
Until 14 points Until 7 points Until 0 points
Final score 75