IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v260y2017i2p665-679.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weighted sum model with partial preference information: Application to multi-objective optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Kaddani, Sami
  • Vanderpooten, Daniel
  • Vanpeperstraete, Jean-Michel
  • Aissi, Hassene

Abstract

Multi-objective optimization problems often lead to large nondominated sets, as the size of the problem or the number of objectives increases. Generating the whole nondominated set requires significant computation time, while most of the corresponding solutions are irrelevant to the decision maker (DM). Optimizing an aggregation function reduces the computation time and produces one or a very limited number of more focused solutions. This requires, however, the elicitation of precise preference parameters, which is often difficult and partly arbitrary, and might discard solutions of interest. An intermediate approach consists in using partial preference information with an aggregation function. In this work, we present a preference relation based on the weighted sum aggregation, where weights are not precisely defined. We give some properties of this preference relation and define the set of preferred points as the set of nondominated points with respect to this relation. We provide an efficient and generic way of generating this preferred set using any standard multi-objective optimization algorithm. This approach shows competitive performances both on computation time and quality of the generated preferred set.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaddani, Sami & Vanderpooten, Daniel & Vanpeperstraete, Jean-Michel & Aissi, Hassene, 2017. "Weighted sum model with partial preference information: Application to multi-objective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(2), pages 665-679.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:260:y:2017:i:2:p:665-679
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221717300085
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.01.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Craig W. Kirkwood & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1985. "Ranking with Partial Information: A Method and an Application," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 38-48, February.
    2. Gordon B. Hazen, 1986. "Partial Information, Dominance, and Potential Optimality in Multiattribute Utility Theory," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 296-310, April.
    3. Greco, Salvatore & Mousseau, Vincent & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 416-436, December.
    4. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    5. Carrizosa, E. & Conde, E. & Fernandez, F. R. & Puerto, J., 1995. "Multi-criteria analysis with partial information about the weighting coefficients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 291-301, March.
    6. Peter C. Fishburn, 1965. "Analysis of Decisions with Incomplete Knowledge of Probabilities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 217-237, April.
    7. Insua, David Rios & French, Simon, 1991. "A framework for sensitivity analysis in discrete multi-objective decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 176-190, September.
    8. Kirlik, Gokhan & Sayın, Serpil, 2014. "A new algorithm for generating all nondominated solutions of multiobjective discrete optimization problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 479-488.
    9. Hunt, Brian J. & Wiecek, Margaret M. & Hughes, Colleen S., 2010. "Relative importance of criteria in multiobjective programming: A cone-based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 936-945, December.
    10. Kmietowicz, ZW & Pearman, AD, 1984. "Decision theory, linear partial information and statistical dominance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 391-399.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Yue & Zhang, Qi & Farnoosh, Arash & Chen, Siyuan & Li, Yan, 2019. "GIS-Based Multi-Objective Particle Swarm Optimization of charging stations for electric vehicles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 844-853.
    2. Islam, Samiul & Amin, Saman Hassanzadeh & Wardley, Leslie J., 2021. "Machine learning and optimization models for supplier selection and order allocation planning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    3. Nawal Benabbou & Patrice Perny, 2018. "Interactive resolution of multiobjective combinatorial optimization problems by incremental elicitation of criteria weights," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 6(3), pages 283-319, November.
    4. Federico Toffano & Michele Garraffa & Yiqing Lin & Steven Prestwich & Helmut Simonis & Nic Wilson, 2022. "A multi-objective supplier selection framework based on user-preferences," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 609-640, January.
    5. Ding, Jiankun & Han, Deqiang & Yang, Yi, 2018. "Iterative ranking aggregation using quality improvement of subgroup ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(2), pages 596-612.
    6. Longda Wang & Xingcheng Wang & Zhao Sheng & Senkui Lu, 2020. "Multi-Objective Shark Smell Optimization Algorithm Using Incorporated Composite Angle Cosine for Automatic Train Operation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-25, February.
    7. Ashoke Kumar Bera & Dipak Kumar Jana & Debamalya Banerjee & Titas Nandy, 2021. "A Two-Phase Multi-criteria Fuzzy Group Decision Making Approach for Supplier Evaluation and Order Allocation Considering Multi-objective, Multi-product and Multi-period," Annals of Data Science, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 577-601, September.
    8. Bing Han & Shanshan Shi & Haotian Gao & Yan Hu, 2022. "A Sustainable Intermodal Location-Routing Optimization Approach: A Case Study of the Bohai Rim Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-27, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    2. A Mateos & S Ríos-Insua & A Jiménez, 2007. "Dominance, potential optimality and alternative ranking in imprecise multi-attribute decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(3), pages 326-336, March.
    3. K S Park & I Jeong, 2011. "How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1771-1783, October.
    4. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    5. Kim, Soung Hie & Han, Chang Hee, 2000. "Establishing dominance between alternatives with incomplete information in a hierarchically structured attribute tree," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 79-90, April.
    6. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2017. "Deriving rankings from incomplete preference information: A comparison of different approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(1), pages 244-253.
    7. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    8. Vetschera, Rudolf & Chen, Ye & Hipel, Keith W. & Marc Kilgour, D., 2010. "Robustness and information levels in case-based multiple criteria sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 841-852, May.
    9. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2014. "Decision making under uncertainty with unknown utility function and rank-ordered probabilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 537-541.
    10. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2011. "Compatible weighting method with rank order centroid: Maximum entropy ordered weighted averaging approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 552-559, August.
    11. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2020. "Maximum likelihood solutions for multicriterial choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 299-308.
    12. Luis V. Montiel & J. Eric Bickel, 2014. "A Generalized Sampling Approach for Multilinear Utility Functions Given Partial Preference Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 147-170, September.
    13. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    14. Liesio, Juuso & Mild, Pekka & Salo, Ahti, 2007. "Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1488-1505, September.
    15. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    16. Kadziński, Miłosz & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2021. "Active learning strategies for interactive elicitation of assignment examples for threshold-based multiple criteria sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 658-680.
    17. C M Yates, 2007. "A positive approach to estimating the weights for quadratic multiple objective programming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1332-1340, October.
    18. Mustajoki, Jyri, 2012. "Effects of imprecise weighting in hierarchical preference programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 193-201.
    19. Antti Punkka & Ahti Salo, 2014. "Scale Dependence and Ranking Intervals in Additive Value Models Under Incomplete Preference Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 83-104, June.
    20. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Gilberto Montibeller, 2015. "Probability Elicitation Under Severe Time Pressure: A Rank‐Based Method," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1317-1335, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:260:y:2017:i:2:p:665-679. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.