A recursive algorithm for volume-based sensitivity analysis of linear decision models

Computers and Operations Research

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 477-491

  Vetschera, Rudolf ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; DECISION MAKING; LINEAR PROGRAMMING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBLEM SOLVING; RECURSIVE FUNCTIONS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

SIMPLEX-BASED RECURSIVE ALGORITHM;

ALGORITHMS;

EID: 0031139861     PISSN: 03050548     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0305-0548(96)00073-1     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H., Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York, 1976.
2. Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
3. Schoemaker, P. J. H. and Waid, C. C., An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models. Management Science, 1982, 28, 182-196.
4. Delquié, P., Inconsistent trade-offs between attributes: new evidence in preference assessment biases. Management Science, 1993, 39, 1382-1395.
5. von Nitzsch, R. and Weber, M., The effect of attribute ranges on weights in multiattribute utility measurements. Management Science, 1993, 39, 937-943.
6. Weber, M., Eisenführ, F. and von Winterfeldt, D., The effects of splitting attributes on weights in multiattribute utility measurement. Management Science, 1988, 34, 431-445.
7. Arbel, A. and Vargas, L. G., Preference simulation and preference programming: robustness issues in priority derivation. European Journal of Operational Research, 1993, 69, 200-209.
8. Dickson, G. C.A., An empirical examination of the willingness of managers to use utility theory. Journal Management Studies, 1981, 18, 423-434.
9. Weber, M., Decision making with incomplete information. European Journal of Operational Research, 1987, 28, 44-57.
10. French, S., Mathematical programming approaches to sensitivity calculations in decision analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1992, 43, 813-819.
11. Rios Insua, D. and French, S., A framework for sensitivity analysis in discrete multi-objective decision-making. European Journal of Operational Research, 1991, 54, 176-190.
12. Kirkwood, C. W. and Sarin, R. K., Ranking with partial information: a method and an application. Operations Research, 1985, 33, 38-48.
13. Arbel, A., Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation. European Journal of Operational Research, 1989, 43, 317-326.
14. Hansen, P., Labbé, M. and Wendell, R. E., Sensitivity analysis in multiple objective linear programming: the tolerance approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 1989, 38, 63-69.
15. Wolters, W. T. M. and Mareschal, B., Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 1995, 81, 281-290.
16. Barron, H. and Schmidt, C. P., Sensitivity analysis of additive multiattribute value models. Operations Research, 1988, 36, 122-127.
17. Evans, J. R., Sensitivity analysis in decision theory. Decision Sciences, 1984, 15, 239-247.
18. Saaty, T. L. and Vargas, L. G., Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 1987, 32, 107-117.
19. Paulson, D. and Zahir, S., Consequences of uncertainty in the analytic hierarchy process: a simulation approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 1995, 87, 45-56.
20. Schneller, G. O. and Sphicas, G. P., On sensitivity analysis in decision theory. Decision Sciences, 1985, 16, 399-409.
21. Starr, M. K., Product Design and Decision Theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1962.
22. Schneller, G. O. and Sphicas, G. P., Decision making under uncertainty: Starr's domain criterion. Theory and Decision, 1983, 15, 321-336.
23. Eiselt, H. A. and Langley, A., Some extensions of domain criteria in decision making under uncertainty. Decision Science, 1990, 21, 138-153.
24. Charnetski, J. R. and Soland, R. M., Multiple-attribute decision making with partial information: the comparative hypervolume criterion. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 1978, 25, 279-288.
25. Eiselt, H. A. and Laporte, G., The use of domains in multicriteria decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 1992, 61, 292-298.
26. Erkut, E. and Tarimcilar, M., On sensitivity analysis in the analytic hierarchy process. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business & Industry, 1991, 3, 61-83.
27. Antunes, C. H. and Clímaco, J., Decision aid for discrete alternative multiple criteria problems: a visual interactive approach. Information and Decision Technologies, 1993, 19, 185-193.
28. Dell, R. F. and Karwan, M. H., An interactive MCDM weight space reduction method utilizing a Tchebycheff utility function. Naval Research Logistics, 1990, 37, 263-277.
29. Cohen, J. and Hickey, T., Two algorithms for determining volumes of convex polyhedra. Journal ACM, 1979, 26, 401-414.
30. Matheiss, T. H. and Rubin, D. S., A survey and comparison of methods for finding all vertices of convex polyhedral sets. Mathematics of Operations Research, 1980, 5, 167-185.
31. Manas, M. and Nedoma, J., Finding all vertices of a convex polyhedron. Numerische Mathematik, 1968, 12, 226-229.
32. Miller, G. A., The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 81-97.