A decision model for selecting slightly non-homogeneous technologies

Applied Mathematics and Computation

Volumn 177, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 149-158

  Farzipoor Saen, Reza ^a  

^a ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

Author keywords

Slightly non homogeneous technologies; Technology selection

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER;

DECISION MODEL; SLIGHTLY NON HOMOGENEOUS TECHNOLOGIES; TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGY SELECTION;

DECISION THEORY;

EID: 33744505162     PISSN: 00963003     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2005.10.043     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Archer N.P., and Ghasemzadeh F. An integrated framework for project portfolio selection. Int. J. Project Manage. 17 4 (1999) 207-216
2. Badri M.A., Davis D., and Davis D. A Comprehensive 0-1 Goal Programming Model for Project Selection. Int. J. Project Manage. 19 4 (2001) 243-252
3. Baker R.C., and Talluri S. A closer look at the use of data Envelopment Analysis for Technology Selection. Comput. Ind. Eng. 32 1 (1997) 101-108
4. E.W.N. Bernroider, V. Stix, Profile distance method-A multi-attribute decision making approach for information system investments, Decis. Support Syst., in press.
5. Cook W.D., Kress M., and Seiford L.M. Data envelopment analysis in the presence of both quantitative and qualitative factors. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 47 7 (1996) 945-953
6. R. Farzipoor Saen, Technologies ranking by super-efficiency analysis, Appl. Math. Comput., submitted for publication.
7. R. Farzipoor Saen, A decision model for technology selection in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data, Appl. Math. Modell., submitted for publication.
8. R. Farzipoor Saen, Technologies ranking in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data, Appl. Math. Comput., in press, doi:10.1016/j.amc.2005.09.037.
9. Farzipoor Saen R., Memariani A., and Hosseinzadeh Lotfi F. Determining relative efficiency of slightly non-homogeneous decision making units by data envelopment analysis: a case study in IROST. Appl. Math. Comput. 165 2 (2005) 313-328
10. Ghasemzadeh F., and Archer N.P. Project portfolio selection through decision support. Decis. Support Syst. 29 1 (2000) 73-88
11. Hair J.R., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., and Black W.C. Multivariate data analysis (1998), Prentice-Hall, New York
12. Hajeeh M., and Al-Othman A. Application of the analytical hierarchy process in the selection of desalination plants. Desalination 174 1 (2005) 97-108
13. Khouja M. The use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Comput. Ind. Eng. 28 1 (1995) 123-132
14. Kim G.C., and Emery J. An application of Zero-One Goal Programming in Project Selection and Resource Planning-A Case Study from the Woodward Governor Company. Comput. Oper. Res. 27 14 (2000) 1389-1408
15. Lee J.W., and Kim S.H. Using analytic network process and Goal Programming for Interdependent Information System Project Selection. Comput. Oper. Res. 27 4 (2000) 367-382
16. Lee J.W., and Kim S.H. An integrated approach for interdependent information system project selection. Int. J. Project Manage. 19 2 (2001) 111-118
17. Malladi S., and Min K.J. Decision support models for the selection of Internet Access Technologies in Rural Communities. Tele. Infor. 22 3 (2005) 201-219
18. Mohamed S., and McCowan A.K. Modelling project investment decisions under uncertainty using possibility theory. Int. J. Project Manage. 19 4 (2001) 231-241
19. Parkan C., and Wu M. Decision-making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Comput. Ind. Eng. 36 3 (1999) 503-523
20. Rao S.S. Optimization theory and applications. second ed. (1984), Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi
21. Saaty T.L. Decision making for leaders (1990), RWS Publications, Pittsburgh
22. Sarkis J., and Talluri S. A decision model for evaluation of Flexible Manufacturing Systems in the Presence of both Cardinal and Ordinal Factors. Int. J. Prod. Res. 37 13 (1999) 2927-2938
23. N. Shehabuddeen, D. Probert, R. Phaal, From theory to practice: challenges in operationalising a technology selection framework, Technovation, in press.
24. Talluri S., Whiteside M.M., and Seipel S.J. A nonparametric stochastic procedure for FMS Evaluation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 124 3 (2000) 529-538
25. Talluri S., and Yoon K.P. A cone-ratio DEA Approach for AMT Justification. Int. J. Prod. Econom. 66 2 (2000) 119-129
26. Wang S. Comments on operational competitiveness Rating Analysis (OCRA). Eur. J. Oper. Res. 169 1 (2006) 329-331
27. Yurdakul M. Selection of Computer-Integrated Manufacturing Technologies Using a Combined Analytic Hierarchy Process and Goal Programming Model. Rob. Comput. Integrated Manuf 20 4 (2004) 329-340