ASP, the art and science of practice: Elements of a theory of the practice of operations research: Expertise in practice

Interfaces

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 313-322

  Murphy, Frederic H ^a  

^a TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision analysis: applications; Professional: comments on

Indexed keywords

EID: 29444453272     PISSN: 00922102     EISSN: 1526551X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/inte.1050.0146     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Armstrong, J. S., ed. 2001. Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.
2. Cammerer, C. F., E. J. Johnson. 1991. The process-performance paradox in expert judgment: How can experts know so much and predict so badly? K. A. Ericsson, J. Smith, eds. Towards a General Theory of Expertise, Prospects and Limits. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
3. Chase, W. G., H. A. Simon. 1973. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology 4(1) 55-81.
4. Checkland, P. 1989. Soft systems methodology. J. Rosenhead, ed. Rational Analysis in a Problematic World. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
5. Checkland, P., J. Scholes. 1990. Soft Systems Methodology in Action. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
6. Chinneck, J. W. 1997. Finding a useful subset of constraints for analysis in an infeasible linear program. INFORMS J. Comput. 9(2) 164-174.
7. Dickens, P., D. McNicol, F. Murphy, J. Zalkind. 1983. Net effects of government intervention in energy markets. Energy J. 4(2) 135-151.
8. Eden, C. 1989. Using cognitive mapping for strategic options development and analysis (SODA). J. Rosenhead, ed. Rational Analysis in a Problematic World. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
9. Ericsson, K. A., N. Charness. 1997. Cognitive and developmental factors in expert performance. P. J. Feltovich, K. M. Ford, R. R. Hoffman, eds. Expertise in Context. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 3-41.
10. Ericsson, K. A., R. J. Crutcher. 1990. The nature of exceptional performance. P. B. Baltes, D. L. Featherman, R. M. Lerner, eds. Life-Span Development and Behavior, Vol. 10. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 187-217.
11. Ericsson, K. A., J. Smith. 1991. Prospects and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. K. A. Ericsson, J. Smith, eds. Towards a General Theory of Expertise, Prospects and Limits. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1-38.
12. Ernst, G. W., A. Newell. 1969. GPS: A Case Study in Generality and Problem Solving. Academic Press, New York.
13. Fossett, C. A., D. Harrison, H. Weintraub, S. I. Gass. 1991. An assessment procedure for simulation models: A case study. Oper. Res. 39(5) 710-723.
14. Gass, S. I. 1983. Decision-aiding models: Validation, assessment, and related issues for policy analysis. Oper. Res. 31(4) 603-631.
15. Greenberg, H. J. 1993. How to analyze the results of linear programs - Part 3: Infeasibility diagnosis. Interfaces 23(6) 120-139.
16. Hodges, J. S. 1991. Six (or so) things you can do with a bad model. Oper. Res. 39(3) 355-365.
17. Kimbrough, S. O., F. H. Murphy. 2005. A study of the Philadelphia knowledge economy. Interfaces 35(3) 248-259.
18. Mayer, R. E. 1992. Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition, 2nd ed. Freeman, New York.
19. McCarl, B. A. 1998. Repairing misbehaving mathematical programming models: Concepts and a GAMS-based approach. Interfaces 28(5) 124-138.
20. Mehring, J. S., M. M. Gutterman. 1990. Supply and distribution planning support for Amoco (U.K.) Limited. Interfaces 20(4) 95-104.
21. Munro, I., J. Mingers. 2004. Response to Richard Ormerod. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 55(1) 90-93.
22. Murphy, F. H. 1996. Annotated bibliography on linear programming models. Interactive Trans. OR/MS 1(4).
23. Murphy, F. H. 2005a. Elements of a theory of the practice of operations research: A framework. Interfaces 35(2) 154-163.
24. Murphy, F. H. 2005b. Elements of a theory of the practice of operations research: Practice as a business. Interfaces 35(6) Forthcoming.
25. Murphy, F. H., V. Panchanadam. 1999. Using analogical reasoning and schema formation to improve the success of formulating LP models. Oper. Res. 47(5) 663-674.
26. Murphy, F. H., S. H. Shaw. 1995. The evolution of energy modeling at the Federal Energy Administration and the Energy Information Administration. Interfaces 25(5) 173-193.
27. Ormerod, R. J. 1996. Information systems strategy development at Sainsbury's supermarkets using "soft" OR. Interfaces 25(1) 102-130.
28. Pauley, G. S., R. J. Ormerod. 1998. The evolution of a performance measurement project at RTZ. Interfaces 28(4) 94-118.
29. Pidd, M., R. N. Woolley. 1980. Just modeling through: A rough guide to modeling. Interfaces 10(1) 51-54.
30. Rosenhead, J. 1989. Diverse unity: The principles and prospects for problem structuring methods. J. Rosenhead, ed. Rational Analysis in a Problematic World. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
31. Roush, W. B., R. H. Stock, T. L. Cravener, T. H. D'Alfonso. 1994. Using chance-constrained programming for animal feed formulation at Agway. Interfaces 24(2) 53-58.
32. Salthouse, T. A. 1991. Expertise as the circumvention of human processing limitations. K. A. Ericsson, J. Smith, eds. Towards a General Theory of Expertise, Prospects and Limits. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 286-300.
33. Schrage, L. 1997. Optimization Modeling with Lindo. Duxbury, Belmont, CA.
34. Shantau, J. 1992. The psychology of experts: An alternative view. G. Wright, F. Bolger, eds. Expertise and Decision Support. Plenum, New York.
35. Simon, H. A., W. G. Chase. 1973. Skill in chess. American Scientist 61(4) 394-403.
36. Sklar, M., R. Pick. 1990. A knowledge engineered linear programming formulation assistant. Proc. Twenty-third Hawaii Internat. Conf. on Systems Sci. University of Hawaii, Manoa, HI, 269-278.
37. Willemain, T. R. 1994. Insights on modeling from a dozen experts. Oper. Res. 42(2) 213-222.
38. Willemain, T. R. 1995. Model formulation: What experts think about and when. Oper. Res. 43(2) 916-932.
39. Woolsey, R. E. D. 1998. The fifth column: On doing well by doing good and an offer of free education. Interfaces 28(2) 99-103.
40. Zeitz, C. M. 1997. Some concrete advantages of abstraction: How experts' representations facilitate reasoning. P. J. Feltovich, K. M. Ford, R. R. Hoffman, eds. Expertise in Context. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 43-65.