A new approach for the selection of advanced manufacturing technologies: DEA with double frontiers

International Journal of Production Research

Volumn 47, Issue 23, 2009, Pages 6663-6679

  Wang, Ying Ming ^a,b   Chin, Kwai Sang ^b  

^a FUZHOU UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Advanced manufacturing technology; AMT selection and justification; Data envelopment analysis; DEA with double frontiers; Optimistic and pessimistic efficiencies; Overall performance

Indexed keywords

ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES; ADVANCED MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY; AMT SELECTION AND JUSTIFICATION; COMPLEX DECISION; CROSS-EFFICIENCY; NEW APPROACHES; NUMERICAL EXAMPLE; PERFORMANCE CRITERION; RELATIVE EFFICIENCY; WEIGHT RESTRICTION;

BLOOD VESSEL PROSTHESES; DATA HANDLING; LINEAR PROGRAMMING; MANUFACTURE; TECHNOLOGY;

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS;

EID: 74549157192     PISSN: 00207543     EISSN: 1366588X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207540802314845     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adler, N., Friedman, L., and Sinuany-Stern, Z., 2002. Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context. European Journal of Operational Research, 140 (2), 249-265.
2. Amin, G.R., 2007. A note on 'an improved MCDM DEA model for technology selection'. International Journal of Production Research, DOI: 10.1080/00207540701528784.
3. Amin, G.R. and Emrouznejad, A., 2007. A note on DEA models in technology selection: an improvement of Karsak and Ahiska's approach. International Journal of Production Research, 45 (10), 2313-2316.
4. Amin, G.R., Toloo, M., and Sohrabi, B., 2006. An improved MCDM DEA model for technology selection. International Journal of Production Research, 44 (13), 2681-2686.
5. Baker, P.C. and Talluri, S., 1997. A closer look at the use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 32 (1), 101-108.
6. Banker, R.D., Charnes, A., and Cooper, W.W., 1984. Some models for estimating technical and scale efficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30 (9), 1078-1092.
7. Braglia, M. and Petroni, A., 1999. Evaluating and selecting investments in industrial robots. International Journal of Production Research, 37 (18), 4157-4178.
8. Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W., 1962. Programming with linear fractional functionals. Naval Research Logistics Quarterly, 9 (3-4), 181-185.
9. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Huang, Z.M., and Sun, D.B., 1990. Polyhedral cone-ratio DEA models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks. Journal of Econometrics, 46 (1-2), 73-91.
10. Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E., 1978. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2 (6), 429-444.
11. Doyle, J. and Green, R., 1994. Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: derivations, meanings and uses. Journal of the Operations Research Society, 45 (5), 567-578.
12. Ertay, T. and Ruan, D., 2005. Data envelopment analysis based decision model for optimal operator allocation in CMS. European Journal of Operational Research, 164 (3), 800-810.
13. Fisher, D.M., Fisher, S.A., Kiang, M.Y., and Chi, R.T., 2004. Evaluating mid-level ERP software. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45 (1), 38-46.
14. Hwang, C.L. and Yoon, K., 1981. Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
15. Karsak, E.E., 1998. A two-phase robot selection procedure. Production Planning & Control, 9 (7), 675-684.
16. Karsak, E.E. and Ahiska, S.S., 2005. Practical common weight multi-criteria decision-making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection. International Journal of Production Research, 43 (8), 1537-1554.
17. Karsak, E.E. and Ahiska, S.S., 2007. Improved common weight MCDM model for technology selection. International Journal of Production Research, DOI: 10.1080/00207540701419364.
18. Khouja, M., 1995. The use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 28 (1), 123-132.
19. Liu, S.T., 2008. A fuzzy DEA/AR approach to the selection of flexible manufacturing systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 54 (1), 66-76.
20. Parkan, C. and Wu, M.L., 1999. Decision-making and performance measurement models with applications to robot selection. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 36 (3), 503-523.
21. Raafat, F., 2002. A comprehensive bibliography on justification of advanced manufacturing systems. International Journal of Production Economics, 79 (3), 197-208.
22. Saaty, T.L., 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
23. Saen, R.F., 2006a. Technologies ranking in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 176 (2), 476-487.
24. Saen, R.F., 2006b. A decision model for selecting slightly non-homogeneous technologies. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 177 (1), 149-158.
25. Saen, R.F., 2006c. A decision model for technology selection in the existence of both cardinal and ordinal data. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181 (2), 1600-1608.
26. Sarkis, J. and Talluri, S., 1999. A decision model for evaluation of flexible manufacturing systems in the presence of both cardinal and ordinal factors. International Journal of Production Research, 37 (13), 2927-2938.
27. Sexton, T.R., Silkman, R.H., and Hogan, A.J., 1986. Data envelopment analysis: critique and extensions, In: R.H. Silkman, ed. Measuring efficiency: An assessment of data envelopment analysis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28. Shafer, S.M. and Bradford, J.W., 1995. Efficiency measurement of alternative machine component grouping solutions via data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 42 (2), 159-165.
29. Shang, J. and Sueyoshi, T., 1995. A unified framework for the selection of flexible manufacturing system. European Journal of Operational Research, 85 (2), 297-315.
30. Sun, S., 2002. Assessing computer numerical control machines using data envelopment analysis. International Journal of Production Research, 40 (9), 2011-2039.
31. Talluri, S. and Yoon, K.P., 2000. A cone-ratio DEA approach for AMT justification. International Journal of Production Economics, 66 (2), 119-129.
32. Talluri, S. and Sarkis, J., 1997. Extensions in efficiency measurement of alternate machine component grouping solutions via data envelopment analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 44 (3), 299-304.
33. Talluri, S., Whiteside, M.M., and Seipel, S.J., 2000. A nonparametric stochastic procedure for FMS evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 124 (3), 529-538.
34. Wang, Y.M., Chin, K.S., and Yang, J.B., 2007. Measuring the performances of decision making units using geometric average efficiency. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 58 (7), 929-937.
35. Zimmermann, H.J., 1991. Fuzzy set theory and its applications. 2nd ed. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.