A dea-based approach to ranking multi-criteria alternatives

International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 29-54

  Köksalan, Murat ^a   Tuncer, Ceren ^a  

^a MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Integer programming; Multi objective

Indexed keywords

EID: 60349101154     PISSN: 02196220     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S0219622009003259     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. W. D. Cook and M. Kress, A data envelopment model for aggregating preference rankings, Manag. Sci. 36(11) (1990) 1302-1310.
2. W. D. Cook, Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 172 (2006) 369-385.
3. Z. F. Landsdowne, Ordinal ranking methods for multicriterion decision making, Naval Res. Logist. 43 (1996) 613-627.
4. A. Charnes, W. W. Cooper and E. Rhodes, Measuring efficiency of decision making units, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2 (1978) 429-444.
5. P. Andersen and N. C. Petersen, A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis, Manag. Sci. 39(10) (1993) 1261-1264.
6. J. Doyle and R. Green, Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses, J. Oper. Res. Soc. 45(5) (1994) 567-578.
7. J. J. Rousseau and J. H. Semple, Radii of classification preservation in data envelopment analysis: A case study of follow-through," J. Oper. Res. Soc. 46(8) (1995) 943-957.
8. Z. Sinuany-Stern, A. Mehrez and A. Barboy, Academic departments efficiency via DEA, Comput. Oper. Res. 21(5) (1994) 543-556.
9. L. C. Liu, C. Lee and G. H. Tzeng, DEA approach for the current and the cross period efficiency for evaluating the vocational education, Int. J. Inform. Technol. & Decision Making 3(2) (2004) 353-374.
10. D. Wu, L. Liang, Z. Huang and S. X. Li, Aggregated ratio analysis in DEA, Int. J. Inform. Technol. & Decision Making 4(3) (2005) 369-384.
11. Y. Chen, L. Motiwalla and M. R. Khan, Using super-efficiency DEA to evaluate financial performance of e-business initiative in the retail industry, Int. J. Inform. Technol. & Decision Making 3(2) (2004) 337-351.
12. T. R. Anderson, K. Hoolingsworth and L. Inman, The fixed weighting nature of a cross evaluation model, J. Product. Anal. 17(3) (2002) 249-255.
13. M. Halme, T. Joro, P. Korhonen, S. Salo and J. Wallenius, A value efficiency approach to incorporating preference information in data envelopment analysis, Manag. Sci. 45(1) (1999) 103-115.
14. R. Allen and E. Thanassoulis, Improving envelopment in data envelopment analysis, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 154(2) (2004) 363-379.
15. R. Allen, A. Athanassopoulos, R. G. Dyson and E. Thanassoulis, Weights restrictions and value judgements in data envelopment analysis: Evolution, development and future directions, Ann. Oper. Res. 73 (1997) 13-34.
16. R. G. Thompson, L. N. Langemeier, C.-T. Lee, E. Lee and R. M. Thrall, The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with applications to kansas farming, J. Econ. 46 (1990) 93-108.
17. Y.-H. B. Wong and J. E. Beasley, Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis, J. Oper. Res. Soc. 41(9) (1990) 829-835.
18. A. K. Jain, M. N. Murty and P. J. Flynn, Data clustering: A review, ACM Comput. Surv. 31(3) (1999) 264-323.
19. Financial Times, FT.com/Business Education/Global MBA Rankings (2006), http://rankings.ft.com/rankings/mba/rankings.html, last date accessed: 26.07.2006.
20. M. K̈oksalan, T. B̈uÿukba,saran, ̈O. ̈Ozpeynirci and J.Wallenius, An approach to ranking with an application to MBA programs, Technical Report, METU IE Department, Eur. J. Oper. Res. forthcoming (2009).