Promoting symmetric weight selection in data envelopment analysis: A penalty function approach

European Journal of Operational Research

Volumn 200, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 281-288

  Dimitrov, Stanko ^a   Sutton, Warren ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Data envelopment analysis; Penalty methods; Weight restrictions

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING UNIT; EXISTING METHOD; FEASIBLE SOLUTION; PENALTY FUNCTION APPROACH; PENALTY METHODS; PREDEFINED RANGE; SEVERAL VARIABLES; WEIGHT ASSIGNMENT; WEIGHT RESTRICTION; WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS;

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; LINEAR PROGRAMMING;

WEIGHING;

EID: 69249238075     PISSN: 03772217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2008.11.043     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Allen R., Athanassopoulos A., Dyson R.G., and Thanassoulis E. Weights restrictions and value judgements in data envelopment analysis: Evolution, development and future directions. Annals of Operations Research 73 (1997) 13-34.
2. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2 6 (1978) 429-444.
3. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Wei Q.L., and Huang Z.M. Cone ratio data envelopment analysis and multi-objective programming. International Journal of Systems Science 20 7 (1989) 1099-1118.
4. In: Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Lewin A.Y., and Seiford L.M. (Eds). Data Envelopment Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Applications. first ed. (1995), Springer.
5. Cooper W.W., Seiford L.M., and Zhu J. Handbook on data envelopment analysis. International Series in Operations Research and Management Science vol. 71 (2004), Kluwer Academic
6. Dyson R.G., and Thanassoulis E. Reducing weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society 39 6 (1988) 563-576.
7. Eilat H., Golany B., and Shtub A. Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolios of r&d projects with interactions: A dea based methodology. European Journal of Operational Research 172 3 (2006) 1018-1039.
8. Estellita Lins M.P., Moreira da Silva A.C., and Lovell C.A.K. Avoiding infeasibility in dea models with weight restrictions. European Journal of Operational Research 181 2 (2007) 956-966.
9. Halme M., and Korhonen P. Restricting weights in value efficiency analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 126 1 (2000) 175-188.
10. ILOG, S.A., ILOG, I., 2008. ILOG AMPL CPLEX System Version 11.0 User's Guide Standard (Command-line) Version Including CPLEX Directives (January).
11. Liu C.-C. Simulating weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis using the subjective and objective integrated approach. Applied Economics 38 21 (2006) 2545-2552.
12. Mangasarian O.L. The linear complementarity problem as a separable bilinear program. Journal of Global Optimization 6 2 (1995) 153-161.
13. Miles K.H. Freeing resources for improving schools: A case study of teacher allocation in boston public schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 17 4 (1995) 476-493.
14. Pardalos P.M., and Rosen J.B. Constrained Global Optimization: Algorithms and Applications (Lecture Notes in Computer Science) (1987), Springer-Verlag.
15. Pedraja-Chaparro F., Salinas-Jimenez J., and Smith P. On the role of weight restrictions in data envelopment analysis. Journal of Productivity Analysis 8 2 (1997) 215-230.
16. Roll Y., Cook W.D., and Golany B. Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IIE Transactions 23 1 (1991) 2-9
17. Roll Y., and Golany B. Alternate methods of treating factor weights in dea. Omega 21 1 (1993) 99-109.
18. Sarrico C.S., and Dyson R.G. Restricting virtual weights in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research 159 1 (2004) 17-34.
19. Swink M., Talluri S., and Pandejpong T. Faster, better, cheaper: A study of npd project efficiency and performance tradeoffs. Journal of Operations Management 24 5 (2006) 542-562.
20. Thompson R.G., Singleton F.D., Thrall R.M., and Smith A. Comparative site evaluations for locating a high-energy physics lab in texas. Interface 16 (1986) 35-49
21. Thompson R.G., Langemeier L.N., Lee C.-T., Lee E., and Thrall R.M. The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to kansas farming. Journal of Econometrics 46 1-2 (1990) 93-108.
22. Wong Y.H.B., and Beasley J.E. Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society 41 9 (1990) 829-835. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2583498