Ranking Decision Making Units by Compromise Programming
-
2212
Downloads
-
3634
Views
Authors
Majid Darehmiraki
- Department of Mathematics, Khatam Alanbia University of Technology, Behbahan, Khouzestan, Iran
Zahra Behdani
- -Department of Mathematics, Khatam Alanbia University of Technology, Behbahan, Khouzestan, Iran
Abstract
Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is a very useful management and decision tool. The ranking of decision making units (DMU) has become an important component in the decision process. In this paper we developed a new method for measuring the efficiency score of Decision-Making Units (DMUs) by using compromise programming. The proposed method calculates distance to the ideal for each DMU. The DMU with shorter distance to the ideal has better efficiency. A numerical example is provided to illustrate the application of the proposed DEA model.
Share and Cite
ISRP Style
Majid Darehmiraki, Zahra Behdani, Ranking Decision Making Units by Compromise Programming, Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 4 (2012), no. 4, 536--541
AMA Style
Darehmiraki Majid, Behdani Zahra, Ranking Decision Making Units by Compromise Programming. J Math Comput SCI-JM. (2012); 4(4):536--541
Chicago/Turabian Style
Darehmiraki, Majid, Behdani, Zahra. "Ranking Decision Making Units by Compromise Programming." Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 4, no. 4 (2012): 536--541
Keywords
- Data envelopment analysis
- Ideal decision making (IDMU)
- Compromise programming
MSC
References
-
[1]
P. Anderson, N. C. Petersen, A pdrocedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis, Management science, 39 (1993), 1261--1264
-
[2]
A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper, E. Rhodes, Measuring the efficiency of decision making units, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2 (1978), 429--444
-
[3]
F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, G. R. Jahanshahloo, A. Memariani, A method for finding common set of weights by multiple objective Programming in data envelopment analysis, Southwest journal of pure and applied mathematics, 1 (2000), 44--54
-
[4]
C. Kao, Weight determination for consistently ranking alternatives in multiple criteria decision analysis, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 34 (2010), 1779--1787
-
[5]
S. Mehrabian, M. R. Alirezaee, G. R. Jahanshahloo, A complete efficiency ranking of decision making units in data envelopment analysis, Computational optimization and applications, 14 (1999), 261--266
-
[6]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, M. Sanei, Review of ranking models in dataenvelopment analysis, Applied mathematical sciences, 2 (2008), 1431--1448
-
[7]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, N. Shoja, G. Tohidi, S. Razavian, Ranking using norm in data envelopment analysis, Applied mathematics and computational, 153 (2004), 215--224
-
[8]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. Rezai Balf, H. Zhiani Rezai, D. Akbarian, Ranking efficient DMUs using tchebycheff norm, Working Paper, Iran (2004)
-
[9]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, M. Sanei, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, N. Shoja, Using the gradient line for ranking DMUs in DEA, Applied mathematics and computation, 151 (2004), 209--219
-
[10]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, M. Sanei, N. Shoja, Modified ranking models, using the concept of advantage in data envelopment analysis, Working paper, Iran (2004)
-
[11]
G. R. Jahanshahloo, F. Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. Rezai Balf, H. Zhiani Rezai, Using Monte Carlo method for ranking efficient DMUs, Aplied Mathematic and Computation, 162 (2005), 371--379
-
[12]
M. S. Saati, M. Zarafat Angiz, G. R. Jahanshahloo, A model for ranking decision making units in data envelopment analysis, Recrca operative, Vol. 31 (2001)
-
[13]
T. Sueyoshy, DEA nonparametric ranking test and index measurement: Slack-adjusted DEA and an application to Japanese agriculture cooperatives, Omega, 27 (1999), 315--326
-
[14]
K. Tone, A slack-Based measure of efficiency in data envelopment Analysis, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 130 (2001), 498--509
-
[15]
K. Tone, A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 143 (2002), 32--41
-
[16]
Y.-M. Wang, Y. Luo, DEA efficiency assessment using ideal anti-ideal decision making units, Applied mathematics and computation, 173 (2006), 902--915