preference statements

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

5/30/2014 Aosta, May 24th 2012 SESAMO: a decision support system for the Multi Criteria Analysis Fiorella GRASSO, Stefano MARAN (PP3) Project Final Meeting.

Advertisements

Teknillinen korkeakoulu Systeemianalyysin laboratorio 1 Graduate school seminar Rank-Based DEA-Efficiency Analysis Samuli Leppänen Systems.

Multi‑Criteria Decision Making

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Robust Portfolio Modeling for Scenario-Based Project Appraisal Juuso Liesiö, Pekka Mild.

1 Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory Aalto University School of Science P.O. Box 11100, Aalto.

1PRIME Decisions - An Interactive Tool for Value Tree Analysis Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory PRIME Decisions - An Interactive.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory RPM – Robust Portfolio Modeling for Project Selection Pekka Mild, Juuso Liesiö and Ahti Salo.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory RICHER – A Method for Exploiting Incomplete Ordinal Information in Value Trees Antti Punkka.

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Multi-Criteria Capital Budgeting with Incomplete Preference Information Pekka Mild, Juuso.

Analytic Hierarchy Process Multiple-criteria decision-making Real world decision problems –multiple, diverse criteria –qualitative as well as quantitative.

Copyright © 2006 Pearson Education Canada Inc Course Arrangement !!! Nov. 22,Tuesday Last Class Nov. 23,WednesdayQuiz 5 Nov. 25, FridayTutorial 5.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology A Preference Programming Approach to Make the Even Swaps Method Even Easier Jyri Mustajoki.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision Support for the Even Swaps Process with Preference Programming Jyri Mustajoki Raimo.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Using Intervals for Global Sensitivity and Worst Case Analyses in Multiattribute Value Trees.

Presented by Johanna Lind and Anna Schurba Facility Location Planning using the Analytic Hierarchy Process Specialisation Seminar „Facility Location Planning“

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Robust Portfolio Selection in Multiattribute Capital Budgeting Pekka Mild and Ahti Salo.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision and Negotiation Support in Multi-Stakeholder Development of Lake Regulation Policy.

ELearning / MCDA Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Introduction to Value Tree Analysis eLearning resources / MCDA team Director.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Ahti Salo and Antti Punkka Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology.

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Robust Portfolio Modeling in the Development of National Research Priorities Ville Brummer.

Binary decision diagrams for computing the non-dominated set July 13, 2015 Antti Toppila and Ahti Salo 27th European Conference on Operational Research,

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Rank-Based Sensitivity Analysis of Multiattribute Value Models Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo.

1 1 Slide © 2004 Thomson/South-Western Chapter 17 Multicriteria Decisions n Goal Programming n Goal Programming: Formulation and Graphical Solution and.

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory RPM-Explorer - A Web-based Tool for Interactive Portfolio Decision Analysis Erkka Jalonen.

Roles of Economists and New Analytical Requirements

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology

1 Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology How to Benefit from Decision Analysis in Environmental Life Cycle Assessment Pauli Miettinen.

Multi-Criteria Decision Making by: Mehrdad ghafoori Saber seyyed ali

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory INFORMS 2007 Seattle Efficiency and Sensitivity Analyses in the Evaluation of University.

Vendor Selection Farrokh Alemi, Ph.D.. Alemi at Georgetown 2 Objectives Model decision makers preferences Facilitate communication and documentation.

1 Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Aalto University, School of Science December, 2010 Aiding Decisions, Negotiating and.

A Dynamic Interval Goal Programming Approach to the Regulation of a Lake-River System Raimo P. Hämäläinen Juha Mäntysaari S ystems Analysis Laboratory.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Raimo P. Hämäläinen Jyri Mustajoki Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of.

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Selecting Forest Sites for Voluntary Conservation in Finland Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Practical dominance and process support in the Even Swaps method Jyri Mustajoki Raimo P.

Multi-Criteria Analysis - preference weighting. Defining weights for criteria Purpose: to express the importance of each criterion relative to other criteria.

1 Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Selecting Forest Sites for Voluntary Conservation with Robust Portfolio Modeling Antti.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology.

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Prioritizing Failure Events in Fault Tree Analysis Using Interval-valued Probability Estimates PSAM ’11 and ESREL 2012, Antti Toppila and Ahti.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory 1DAS workshop Ahti A. Salo and Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Portfolio and Scenario Analysis in the Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Weapon Systems Jussi.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 1 Decision Analysis Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University.

Helsinki University of Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Incomplete Ordinal Information in Value Tree Analysis Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo Systems.

Applied Mathematics 1 Applications of the Multi-Weighted Scoring Model and the Analytical Hierarchy Process for the Appraisal and Evaluation of Suppliers.

1 School of Science and Technology Systems Analysis Laboratory Graduate school seminar presentation Current research topics in Portfolio Decision.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Master’s Thesis Antti Punkka “ Uses of Ordinal Preference Information in Interactive Decision.

1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Effects-Based Operations as a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Problem Jouni Pousi, Kai.

1 Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis (REA) Antti Punkka and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory Aalto University School of Science and Technology P.O. Box.

S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology 15th MCDM conference - Ankara Mats Lindstedt / 1 Using Intervals for Global.

ESTIMATING WEIGHT Course: Special Topics in Remote Sensing & GIS Mirza Muhammad Waqar Contact: EXT:2257 RG712.

Mustajoki, Hämäläinen and Salo Decision support by interval SMART/SWING / 1 S ystems Analysis Laboratory Helsinki University of Technology Decision support.

Mikko Harju*, Juuso Liesiö**, Kai Virtanen*

Flexible and Interactive Tradeoff Elicitation Procedure

Aiding Decisions and Collecting Opinions on the Web

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Tuomas J. Lahtinen, Raimo P. Hämäläinen, Cosmo Jenytin

A Scoring Model for Job Selection

Aiding Decisions and Collecting Opinions on the Web

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Incomplete ordinal information in value tree analysis and comparison of DMU’s efficiency ratios with incomplete information Antti Punkka supervisor Prof.

D E C I S I O N A R I U M g l o b a l s p a c e f o r d e c i s i o n s u p p o r t group decision making multicriteria decision analysis group.

Raimo P. Hämäläinen Systems Analysis Laboratory

Agenda for This Week Monday, April 25 AHP Wednesday, April 27

Decision support by interval SMART/SWING Methods to incorporate uncertainty into multiattribute analysis Ahti Salo Jyri Mustajoki Raimo P. Hämäläinen.

Games with Incomplete Preferences

Juuso Liesiö, Pekka Mild and Ahti Salo Systems Analysis Laboratory

Introduction to Value Tree Analysis

FITradeoff Method (Flexible and Interactive Tradeoff)

Presentation transcript:

preference statements D E C I S I O N T H E O R Y Preference Programming Ratio-based Efficiency Analysis Interval goal programming incomplete information comparison of DMUs under incomplete information about the output and input weights extension of a goal point to a goal set in value tree analysis Goal point: (g1,g2) Goal set (intervals): ([l1,u1],[l2,u2]) Consistent ? Add new / revise preference statements no Recommendations by “decision rules” Overall value and ranking intervals Dominance relations Interpretation of results Display of results and recommendations Adequate ? yes Decision x2 x2 u1/u2 0.5 1 E1 E2 E3 E4 E* E0 E1 / E*=1 E1 / E*=0.6 E1 / E*[0.6,1.0] E2 / E*[0.9,1.0] ... E3 / E0[1.2,1.6] E4 / E0[1.0,1.3] E3 / E0 = 1.2 E3 / E0 = 1.6 x* x* S S DMU1 DMU3 DMU2 DMU4 DMU1 DMU3 DMU2 DMU4 ranking 1 ranking 2 ranking 3 ranking 4 x1 x1 new flexibility in dynamic problems time x t1 t2 t3 tk efficiency bounds dominance relations attainable rankings interval methods: Preference Assessment by Imprecise Ratio Statements (PAIRS) Interval AHP Preference Ratios in Multiattribute Evaluation (PRIME) Interval SMART/SWING sensitivity of university rankings - what if slightly different weigths were applied? global sensitivity analysis exact weights 20 % interval 30 % interval incomplete ordinal no information Robust rankings ”Different weighting would likely yield a better ranking” 10th 442nd Alternative Strategy 0 Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4 Utility 0.474 0.697 0.694 0.748 0.628 Costs Other cancers Political cost Soc.-Psych Negative Soc.-Psych Positive Thyroid cancer incomplete ordinal information: Rank Inclusion in Criteria Hierarchies (RICH) RICHER = RICH with Extended Rankings origins of procedural and behavioral biases Number of attribute levels effect in conjoint analysis Splitting bias Rank reversal in AHP Averages over a group yield even weights Normalization Weights derived from ordinal infromation Division of attributes changes weights Range effect Hierarchical weighting leads to steeper weigths Weighting methods yield different web-sites and selected publications http://www.decisionarium.hut.fi A. Salo and A. Punkka: Ranking intervals and dominance relations for Ratio-based Efficiency Analysis, manuscript, 2010 A. Punkka and A. Salo: Preference Programming with incomplete ordinal information, manuscript, 2010 A. Salo and R. P. Hämäläinen: Preference Programming - multicriteria weighting models under incomplete information, in: Zopounidis and Pardalos (eds.): Handbook of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, Springer, New York, 2010 J. Liesiö, P. Mild and A. Salo: Preference programming for robust multi-criteria portfolio modeling and project selection, Eur. J. Oper. Res. (EJOR), 2007 J. Mustajoki, R. P. Hämäläinen and M. R. K. Lindstedt: Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst case analyses in multiattribute value trees, EJOR, 2006 A. Salo and A. Punkka: Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies, EJOR, 2005 J. Mustajoki, R. P. Hämäläinen and A. Salo: Decision Support by Interval SMART/SWING - Incorporating Imprecision in the SMART and SWING Methods, Decision Sciences, 2005 A. Salo and R. P. Hämäläinen: Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME), IEEE Syst. Man Cybernetics, 2001 R. P. Hämäläinen and J. Mäntysaari: A dynamic interval goal programming approach to the regulation of a lake-river system, J. Multi-Crit. Dec. Anal., 2001 A. Salo and R. P. Hämäläinen: Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons, EJOR, 1995 A. Salo and R. P. Hämäläinen: Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements, Operations Research, 1992 Updated 17.05.2010 Systems Analysis Laboratory