Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions

碩士 === 東吳大學 === 企業管理學系 === 102 === Multi-criteria decision making has various applications in real life. We face Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) problems every day and their criteria very often conflict with each other. MCDM methods have been developed to support decision makers to enhance...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pei-Jen Tiao, 刁培正
Other Authors: Jei-Zheng Wu
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2014
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/50299818932348778817
id ndltd-TW-102SCU00121068
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-TW-102SCU001210682016-02-21T04:27:39Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/50299818932348778817 Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions 多準則非凌越解評選方法之探討 Pei-Jen Tiao 刁培正 碩士 東吳大學 企業管理學系 102 Multi-criteria decision making has various applications in real life. We face Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) problems every day and their criteria very often conflict with each other. MCDM methods have been developed to support decision makers to enhance decision quality. MCDM methods use various calculation methods to evaluate the rank of alternatives. Yet, little evidence could support that the best alternative chosen by MCDM method is same with the decision maker’s ideal alternative. On the other hand, decision makers may provide inconsistent preferences due to cognitive biases. For example, the prospect theory advocates that decision makers show different risk attitudes according to different reference points. Therefore, this study aims to examine and compare existing seven seven MCDM methods including TOPSIS, VIKOR, ELECTRE and the piecewise linear prospect theory method (PLP) in terms of effectiveness by using simulation experiements. Controlling variables include number of alternatives, number of criteria, distribution of data set and dominated or non-dominated data set. We also add three different weight combination in these experiments to see how weights affect the MCDM methods. We test four different utility functions. Except the compensatory, non-compensatory and portion of compensatory utility functions, we also use the prospect theory utility function. After that, we compare the MCDM methods’ ranks with decision maker’s ranks by using assumed preference utility functions. The result shows that interactive methods such as PLP and AHP can provide accurate rank to reflect decision makers’ true wishes. Added to this, PLP can use less interactive times than AHP. All of these methods are based on linear utility function, future research might add different utility concept in MCDM methods. Jei-Zheng Wu 吳吉政 2014 學位論文 ; thesis 79 zh-TW
collection NDLTD
language zh-TW
format Others
sources NDLTD
description 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 企業管理學系 === 102 === Multi-criteria decision making has various applications in real life. We face Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) problems every day and their criteria very often conflict with each other. MCDM methods have been developed to support decision makers to enhance decision quality. MCDM methods use various calculation methods to evaluate the rank of alternatives. Yet, little evidence could support that the best alternative chosen by MCDM method is same with the decision maker’s ideal alternative. On the other hand, decision makers may provide inconsistent preferences due to cognitive biases. For example, the prospect theory advocates that decision makers show different risk attitudes according to different reference points. Therefore, this study aims to examine and compare existing seven seven MCDM methods including TOPSIS, VIKOR, ELECTRE and the piecewise linear prospect theory method (PLP) in terms of effectiveness by using simulation experiements. Controlling variables include number of alternatives, number of criteria, distribution of data set and dominated or non-dominated data set. We also add three different weight combination in these experiments to see how weights affect the MCDM methods. We test four different utility functions. Except the compensatory, non-compensatory and portion of compensatory utility functions, we also use the prospect theory utility function. After that, we compare the MCDM methods’ ranks with decision maker’s ranks by using assumed preference utility functions. The result shows that interactive methods such as PLP and AHP can provide accurate rank to reflect decision makers’ true wishes. Added to this, PLP can use less interactive times than AHP. All of these methods are based on linear utility function, future research might add different utility concept in MCDM methods.
author2 Jei-Zheng Wu
author_facet Jei-Zheng Wu
Pei-Jen Tiao
刁培正
author Pei-Jen Tiao
刁培正
spellingShingle Pei-Jen Tiao
刁培正
Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
author_sort Pei-Jen Tiao
title Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
title_short Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
title_full Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
title_fullStr Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
title_full_unstemmed Study of Multiple Criteria Decision-making Methods on Non-dominated Solutions
title_sort study of multiple criteria decision-making methods on non-dominated solutions
publishDate 2014
url http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/50299818932348778817
work_keys_str_mv AT peijentiao studyofmultiplecriteriadecisionmakingmethodsonnondominatedsolutions
AT diāopéizhèng studyofmultiplecriteriadecisionmakingmethodsonnondominatedsolutions
AT peijentiao duōzhǔnzéfēilíngyuèjiěpíngxuǎnfāngfǎzhītàntǎo
AT diāopéizhèng duōzhǔnzéfēilíngyuèjiěpíngxuǎnfāngfǎzhītàntǎo
_version_ 1718194604398870528