Sensitivity analysis for assessing preferentially independent order relations

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 23, Issue 12, 1996, Pages 1119-1130

  Kämpke, Thomas ^a  

^a Forsch Inst A   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; INTEGER PROGRAMMING; LINEAR PROGRAMMING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

ADDITIVE VALUE FUNCTIONS; MIXED INTEGER PROGRAMMING; RANKING SENSITIVITY;

OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

EID: 0030415860     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0548(96)00038-X     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Debreu, G., Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences Arrow, eds K.J. Arrow, S. Karlin and P. Suppes, pp. 16-26. Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1959.
2. Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H., Decisions with Multiple Objectives. John Wiley, New York, 1976.
3. Kirkwood, C.W. and Sarin, R.K., Ranking with partial information: a method and an application. Operations Research, 1985, 33, 38-48.
4. Rios Insua, D., Sensitivity Analysis in Multiobjective Decision Making. Springer, Berlin, 1990.
5. Rios Insua, D. and French, S., A framework for sensitivity analysis in discrete multi-objective decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 1991, 54, 176-198.
6. Mosler, K., Multiattribute utility functions, partial information on coefficients, and efficient choice. Operations Research Spektrum, 1991, 13, 87-94.
7. Hazen, G.B., Partial information, dominance, and potential optimality in multiattribute utility theory. Operations Research, 1986, 34, 296-310.
8. Evans, J.R., Sensitivity analysis in decision theory. Decision Sciences, 1984, 15, 239-247.
9. Stewart, T.J., Pruning of decision alternatives in multiple criteria decision making, based on the UTA method for estimating utilities. European Journal of Operational Research, 1987, 28, 79-88.
10. Stewart, T.J., Interactive utility assessment in multicriteria decision analysis using implicit trade-off information. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1988, 39, 285-297.
11. Kämpke, T. and Radermacher, F. J., Robust assessment of preference functions. In Mathematical Modeling in Economics, eds E. Diewert et al., pp. 232-242. Springer, Berlin, 1993.
12. Jacquet-Lagrèze, E., Meziani, R. and Slowinski, R., MOLP with an interactive assessment of a piecewise linear utility function. European Journal of Operational Research, 1987, 31, 350-357.
13. Jacquet-Lagrèze, E. and Siskos, J., Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 1982, 10, 151-164.
14. T. Kämpke, Bestimmung von Präferenzfunktionen Mittels Linearer und Nichtlinearer Optimierungsverfahren. Shaker, Aachen, 1995.
15. Dyer, J.S. and Sarin, R.K., Measurable multiattribute value functions. Operations Research, 1979, 27, 810-822.
16. S. I. Gass, Linear Programming, 4th edn. Mc-Graw Hill, New York, 1975.
17. Gleeson, J. and Ryan, J., Identifying minimally infeasible subsystems of inequalities. ORSA Journal on Computing, 1990, 2, 61-63.
18. Chinneck, J.W. and Dravnieks, E.W., Locating minimal infeasible constraint sets in linear programs. ORSA Journal on Computing, 1991, 3, 157-168.
19. Salo, A. A. and Hämäläinen, Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. Operations Research, 1992, 40, 1053-1061.