Figure 3

Sensitivity test on expert’s weighting scheme. Top panel, comparison of the parameter’s scores s, as assessed through individual-weighted (assessed from expert’s weights w _e ) and equal-weighted (assessed imposing w _e =1) procedures, relative to node 1 of elicitation V. The results from the two methods appear well correlated, showing that the selection of parameters (s>s _m ) is rather stable with respect to w _e . In the bottom panel, we report the statistics on the lower threshold for selected parameters at node 1 of elicitation V, evaluated in the individual-weighted (red) and equal-weighted (blue) procedures. Bars indicate confidence interval (80%) and stars represent the median. The results show that the two procedures results in equivalent medians, but the equal-unweighted procedure generally provides larger confidence intervals. Equivalent results for all nodes and parameters can be found in Selva et al. (2009).