IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v210y2011i2p301-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A posterior preference articulation approach to multiresponse surface optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Dong-Hee
  • Kim, Kwang-Jae
  • Köksalan, Murat

Abstract

In multiresponse surface optimization (MRSO), responses are often in conflict. To obtain a satisfactory compromise, the preference information of a decision maker (DM) on the tradeoffs among the responses should be incorporated into the problem. In most existing work, the DM expresses a subjective judgment on the responses through a preference parameter before the problem-solving process, after which a single solution is obtained. In this study, we propose a posterior preference articulation approach to MRSO. The approach initially finds a set of nondominated solutions without the DM's preference information, and then allows the DM to select the best solution from among the nondominated solutions. An interactive selection method based on pairwise comparisons made by the DM is adopted in our method to facilitate the DM's selection process. The proposed method does not require that the preference information be specified in advance. It is easy and effective in that a satisfactory compromise can be obtained through a series of pairwise comparisons, regardless of the type of the DM's utility function.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Dong-Hee & Kim, Kwang-Jae & Köksalan, Murat, 2011. "A posterior preference articulation approach to multiresponse surface optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 210(2), pages 301-309, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:210:y:2011:i:2:p:301-309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(10)00630-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zionts, Stanley, 1981. "A multiple criteria method for choosing among discrete alternatives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 143-147, June.
    2. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, April.
    3. M Köksalan & E Karasakal, 2006. "An interactive approach for multiobjective decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 532-540, May.
    4. M Köksalan & O Rizi, 2001. "A visual interactive approach for multiple criteria decision making with monotone utility functions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 52(6), pages 665-672, June.
    5. Korhonen, Pekka, 1988. "A visual reference direction approach to solving discrete multiple criteria problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 152-159, March.
    6. Murat Köksalan & Robert D. Plante, 2003. "Interactive Multicriteria Optimization for Multiple-Response Product and Process Design," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 334-347, May.
    7. Dong-Hee Lee & In-Jun Jeong & Kwang-Jae Kim, 2010. "A posterior preference articulation approach to dual-response-surface optimization," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(2), pages 161-171.
    8. Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius & Stanley Zionts, 1984. "Solving the Discrete Multiple Criteria Problem using Convex Cones," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1336-1345, November.
    9. Jeong, In-Jun & Kim, Kwang-Jae, 2009. "An interactive desirability function method to multiresponse optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 412-426, June.
    10. Murat Koksalan, M. & Taner, Orhan V., 1992. "An approach for finding the most preferred alternative in the presence of multiple criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 52-60, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ouyang, Linhan & Ma, Yizhong & Wang, Jianjun & Tu, Yiliu, 2017. "A new loss function for multi-response optimization with model parameter uncertainty and implementation errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 552-563.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    2. Xiaoping Li & Dan Zhu, 2011. "Object technology software selection: a case study," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 5-24, May.
    3. Korhonen, Pekka & Soleimani-damaneh, Majid & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2016. "Dual cone approach to convex-cone dominance in multiple criteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1139-1143.
    4. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid, 2018. "Are multi-criteria decision-making tools useful? An experimental comparative study of three methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 462-471.
    5. Canan Ulu & Murat Köksalan, 2001. "An interactive procedure for selecting acceptable alternatives in the presence of multiple criteria," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 48(7), pages 592-606, October.
    6. Sun, Minghe & Steuer, Ralph E., 1996. "InterQuad: An interactive quad tree based procedure for solving the discrete alternative multiple criteria problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 462-472, March.
    7. Kaynar, Nur & Karsu, Özlem, 2018. "Equitable decision making approaches over allocations of multiple benefits to multiple entities," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 85-98.
    8. Karakaya, G. & Köksalan, M., 2023. "Finding preferred solutions under weighted Tchebycheff preference functions for multi-objective integer programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 215-228.
    9. Koksalan, Murat & Ulu, Canan, 2003. "An interactive approach for placing alternatives in preference classes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 429-439, January.
    10. Nowak, Maciej, 2007. "Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1626-1640, March.
    11. Greco, Salvatore & Mousseau, Vincent & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 416-436, December.
    12. Nasim Nasrabadi & Akram Dehnokhalaji & Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius, 2019. "Using convex preference cones in multiple criteria decision making and related fields," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(6), pages 699-717, August.
    13. Engau, Alexander, 2009. "Tradeoff-based decomposition and decision-making in multiobjective programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 883-891, December.
    14. Asim Roy & Patrick Mackin & Jyrki Wallenius & James Corner & Mark Keith & Gregory Schymik & Hina Arora, 2008. "An Interactive Search Method Based on User Preferences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 203-229, December.
    15. Miettinen, Kaisa & Molina, Julián & González, Mercedes & Hernández-Díaz, Alfredo & Caballero, Rafael, 2009. "Using box indices in supporting comparison in multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 17-24, August.
    16. Branke, Juergen & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman & Zielniewicz, Piotr, 2016. "Using Choquet integral as preference model in interactive evolutionary multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(3), pages 884-901.
    17. P. Korhonen & J. Karaivanova, 1998. "An Algorithm for Projecting a Reference Direction onto the Nondominated Set of Given Points," Working Papers ir98011, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    18. Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka & Kuula, Markku, 2003. "Testing the efficiency of two pairwise comparison methods in discrete multiple criteria problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 496-508, March.
    19. Canan Ulu & Murat Köksalan, 2014. "An interactive approach to multicriteria sorting for quasiconcave value functions," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(6), pages 447-457, September.
    20. Moshkovich, Helen M. & Mechitov, Alexander I. & Olson, David L., 2002. "Ordinal judgments in multiattribute decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(3), pages 625-641, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:210:y:2011:i:2:p:301-309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.