多属性隐式变权决策分析方法

中国管理科学 ›› 2012, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (5): 163-172.

多属性隐式变权决策分析方法

李春好¹, 杜元伟², 孙永河², 田硕 ¹

1. 吉林大学管理学院, 吉林长春 130022;
2. 昆明理工大学管理与经济学院, 云南昆明 650093

收稿日期:2010-07-20 修回日期:2012-08-05 出版日期:2012-10-29 发布日期:2012-10-27
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助项目(70971054);教育部新世纪优秀人才支持计划(NCET-09-0419);教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金资助项目(09YJA630047);吉林大学杰出青年基金资助项目(2010GL);吉林大学"985"工程资助项目

Approach to Multiple Attribute Decision Making with Weights Implicitly Changing

LI Chun-hao¹, DU Yuan-wei², SUN Yong-he², TIAN Shuo¹

1. School of Management, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China;
2. Faculty of Management and Economics, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, 690093, China

Received:2010-07-20 Revised:2012-08-05 Online:2012-10-29 Published:2012-10-27

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为克服多因素变权决策方法的内在缺陷,基于Belton 和Gear提出的B/G-AHP层次分析原理给出了一种隐含式的多属性变权决策建模思想,并运用该思想给出了一种多属性变权决策新方法。它相对于多因素变权决策方法具有三方面的比较优势。其一,依赖的变权偏好信息直接由决策者给出,因而能够克服决策分析者对决策结果的主观武断性影响,更好地反映决策者的真实偏好。其二,不会受到由因素的属性值转化为偏好值所额外引入的主观测度偏差的干扰。其三,对决策者主观判断可能存在的误差予以了旨在弱化其影响的优化控制。数值分析表明新方法拥有较好的变权能力,并且相对于已有方法能够给出更易为决策者所接受的评价结论,因而具有较好的应用有效性。

关键词: 多属性决策, 隐式变权, 决策分析, 层次分析法

Abstract: To overcome shortages of the method of multiple factor decision making with variable weights(MFDMVM), a new weights implicitly changing method for multiple attribute decision making (MADM) is presented based on the principle of analytic hierarchy process(AHP) modified by Belton and Gear (shorted as B/G-AHP). With the modeling method, one new approach to MADM with weights implicitly changing is presented. It has three advantages over the MFDMVM. First, the needed preference information to weights changing is directly provided by the decision maker (DM), and thus the approach can well overcome the decision analyst’s subjective arbitrary influence and better reflect the DM’s real preference. Second, it need not subjectively transform attribute states into preference on attribute states, thus it avoids error interrupts resulted from the state-to-preference transforming. Third,unlike the MFDMVM, it has adopted the optimization technique to reduce the influence of errors within the DM’s subjective judgments. Numerical analysis shows that the new approach does have the efficient capability of giving variable weights to different decision alternatives, can give more acceptable evaluation results than the MFDMVM, and is more applicable to real-world decisions.

Key words: multiple attribute decision making, implicitly-changing weights, decision analysis, analytic hierarchy process

中图分类号:

N94
O159

李春好, 杜元伟, 孙永河, 田硕 . 多属性隐式变权决策分析方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2012, 20(5): 163-172.

LI Chun-hao, DU Yuan-wei, SUN Yong-he, TIAN Shuo. Approach to Multiple Attribute Decision Making with Weights Implicitly Changing[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2012, 20(5): 163-172.

参考文献

[1] Winterfeldt D V, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.
[2] Keeney R L, Raiffa H. Decision with multiple objectives: preference and value tradeoff[M]. New York: Wiley, 1993.
[3] Butler J C, Dyer J S, Jia J. Using attribute to predict objectives in preference models[J]. Decision Analysis, 2006, 3(2): 100-116.
[4] 孙莹,鲍新中. 一种基于方差最大化的组合赋权评价方法及其应用[J]. 中国管理科学, 2011, 19(6): 141-148.
[5] Li Hongxing, Li Lingxia, Wong Jiayin, et al. Fuzzy decision making based on variable weights[J]. Mathematical and Computer Modeling, 2004, 39(2-3): 163-179.
[6] 李德清,李洪兴. 状态变权向量的性质与构造[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2002, 38(4): 455-461.
[7] 李德清,崔红梅,李洪兴. 基于层次变权的多因素决策[J]. 系统工程学报, 2004, 19(3): 258-263.
[8] 李德清, 李洪兴. 变权决策中变权效果分析与状态变权向量的确定[J]. 控制与决策, 2004, 19(11): 1241-1245.
[9] 张丽娅, 李德清.变权决策中确定状态变权向量的理想点法[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2009, 39(6): 93-97.
[10] 张瑞,王攀,丁力. 变权综合的若干问题研究[J]. 微计算机信息, 2006, 22(7-1): 261-263.
[11] Zhang D, Yu P L, Wang P Z. State-dependent weights in multicriteria value functions[J]. Journal of Optimization Theory and Application, 1992, 74(1): 1-21.
[12] Kojadinovic I. Estimation of the weights of interacting criteria from the set of profiles by means of information-theoretic functions[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2004, 155(3): 741-751.
[13] Belton V, Gear A E. On the shortcoming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies[J]. Omega, 1983, 11(3): 228-230.
[14] Schoner B, Wedley W C. Ambiguous criteria weights in AHP:consequences and solutions[J]. Decision sciences, 1989, 20(3):462-475.
[15] 王学军,郭亚军. 基于G1法的判断矩阵的一致性分析[J]. 中国管理科学, 2006, 14(3): 65-70.
[16] Saaty T L, Sodenkamp M. Making decisions in hierarchic and network system[J]. International Journal of Applied Decision Sciences, 2008, 1(1): 25-79.
[17] Saaty T L. Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process[J]. Management Science, 1986, 32(5): 841-855.
[18] Stam A, Duarte Silva A P. On multiplicative priority rating methods for the AHP[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2003, 145(1): 92-108.
[19] Smith J E, Winterfieldt D V. Decision analysis in management science[J]. Management Science, 2004, 50(5): 561-574.