A 2-PHASE ASPIRATION-LEVEL AND UTILITY THEORY APPROACH TO LARGE SCALE DESIGN

Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference

Volumn 4, Issue , 2000, Pages 275-285

  Callaghan, Alison R ^a   Lewis, Kemper E ^b  

^a FORD MOTOR COMPANY   (United States)

^b the State University of New York   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; DECISION THEORY;

BASE DESIGN; CRITICAL PROBLEMS; DECISIONS MAKINGS; DESIGN DECISIONS; EARLY DECISION; ENGINEERING DESIGN; FORMAL TECHNIQUES; LARGE-SCALES; MATERIAL PERFORMANCE; UTILITY THEORY;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 84863598100     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1115/DETC2000/DTM-14569     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Barzilai, J. (1998) "On the Decomposition of Value Functions," Operation Research Letters, Vol. 22, pp. 159-170.
2. Callaghan, A. (1999) "A 2-Phase Aspiration-Level and Utility Theory Approach to Large Scale Design," Department of Mechanical Engineering. State University of New York at Buffalo, MS Thesis.
3. Chen, W„ Wiecek, M., and Zhang, J., (1999) "Quality Utility: A Compromise Programming Approach to Robust Design", ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 121, No.2, pp. 179-187.
4. French, S. (1986) Decision Theory: An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
5. Hazelrigg, G.A. (1996) Systems Engineering: An Approach to Information-Based Design. Prentice Hall Press, New York.
6. Keeney, R.L. and Raiffa, H. (1976) Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York.
7. Kersten, G.E. (1985) "NEGO-Group Decision Support System," Information and Management, Vol. 8, pp.237-246.
8. Luce, R.D. and Raiffa, H. (1957) Games and Decisions. Wiley. New York.
9. Messac, A., (1996) "Physical Programming: Effective Optimization for Computational Design," AIAA Journal, Vol. 34, No. l,pp. 149-158.
10. Messac, A., (2000) "From the Dubious Construction of Objective Functions to the Application of Physical Programming," AIAA Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 155-163.
11. Ngwenyama, O.K. and Bryson, N. "Eliciting and Mapping Qualitative Preferences to Numeric Rankings in Group Decision Making," European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 116, pp.487-497.
12. Saaty, T.L. (1994) Fundamentals or Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.
13. Smith, G. (1999) Logical Decisions Manual. Logical Decisions, Golden, CO.
14. Thurston, D.L. (1991) "A Formal Method for Subjective Design Evaluation with Multiple Attributes," Research in Engineering Design. Vol. 3, pp.105-122.
15. Thurston, D.L., Carnahan, J, and Liu, T. (1994) "Optimization of Design Utility," Journal of Mechanical Design. Vol. 116, pp.801-808.
16. Thurston, D. L. (1999) "Real and Perceived Limitations to Decision Based Design," Proceedings of the 1999 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences. DETC99/DTM-8750.
17. Tietz, R. and Bartos, O. J. (1983). "Balancing of Aspiration Levels as Fairness Principle in Negotiations," in Aspiration Levels in Bargaining and Economic Decision Making, R. Tietz (ed), Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
18. Zionts, S, Stewart, T.J., and Lotfi, V. (1992) "An Aspiration-Level Interactive Model for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Computers in Operations Research, Vol. 19, No.7, pp.671-681.