IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v250y2017i1d10.1007_s10479-015-1875-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On comparison of different sets of units used for improving the frontier in DEA models

Author

Listed:
  • Vladimir E. Krivonozhko

    (National University of Science and Technology “MISiS”)

  • Finn R. Førsund

    (University of Oslo)

  • Andrey V. Lychev

    (National University of Science and Technology “MISiS”)

Abstract

Inevitable simplifications of models of real world activities lead to some inadequacies. In the DEA literature several methods were proposed to overcome such difficulties. Some authors proposed to use specific production units in the primal space of inputs and outputs as a starting point in order to improve the frontier of the DEA models. In our previous papers, we introduced the notion of terminal units. It was proved that only terminal units form necessary and sufficient set of units for improving the frontier. In this paper, the relationship between all sets of units proposed for improving the frontier is established. Our theoretical results are confirmed by extensive and instructive graphical examples and also verified by computational experiments using real-life data sets.

Suggested Citation

  • Vladimir E. Krivonozhko & Finn R. Førsund & Andrey V. Lychev, 2017. "On comparison of different sets of units used for improving the frontier in DEA models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 250(1), pages 5-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:250:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-015-1875-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-015-1875-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-015-1875-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-015-1875-8?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. Banker, Rajiv D. & Thrall, R. M., 1992. "Estimation of returns to scale using data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 74-84, October.
    2. V E Krivonozhko & O B Utkin & M M Safin & A V Lychev, 2009. "On some generalization of the DEA models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(11), pages 1518-1527, November.
    3. Finn Førsund, 2013. "Weight restrictions in DEA: misplaced emphasis?," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 271-283, December.
    4. Finn Førsund & Lennart Hjalmarsson & Vladimir Krivonozhko & Oleg Utkin, 2007. "Calculation of scale elasticities in DEA models: direct and indirect approaches," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 45-56, October.
    5. V E Krivonozhko & O B Utkin & A V Volodin & I A Sablin, 2005. "About the structure of boundary points in DEA," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 56(12), pages 1373-1378, December.
    6. Seiford, Lawrence M. & Thrall, Robert M., 1990. "Recent developments in DEA : The mathematical programming approach to frontier analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 7-38.
    7. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    8. Thanassoulis, Emmanuel & Kortelainen, Mika & Allen, Rachel, 2012. "Improving envelopment in Data Envelopment Analysis under variable returns to scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 175-185.
    9. Bougnol, M.-L. & Dulá, J.H., 2009. "Anchor points in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 668-676, January.
    10. Dag Edvardsen & Finn Førsund & Sverre Kittelsen, 2008. "Far out or alone in the crowd: a taxonomy of peers in DEA," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 201-210, June.
    11. Mostafaee, A. & Soleimani-damaneh, M., 2014. "Identifying the anchor points in DEA using sensitivity analysis in linear programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 383-388.
    12. E. Thanassoulis & R. Allen, 1998. "Simulating Weights Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis by Means of Unobserved DMUs," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(4), pages 586-594, April.
    13. William W. Cooper & Lawrence M. Seiford & Kaoru Tone, 2007. "Data Envelopment Analysis," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-0-387-45283-8, June.
    14. Allen, R. & Thanassoulis, E., 2004. "Improving envelopment in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 363-379, April.
    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. Qingxian An & Fanyong Meng & Beibei Xiong & Zongrun Wang & Xiaohong Chen, 2020. "Assessing the relative efficiency of Chinese high-tech industries: a dynamic network data envelopment analysis approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 707-729, July.

    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. Førsund, Finn & Krivonozhko, Vladimir W & Lychev, Andrey V., 2016. "Smoothing the frontier in the DEA models," Memorandum 11/2016, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    2. Vladimir Krivonozhko & Finn Førsund & Andrey Lychev, 2015. "Terminal units in DEA: definition and determination," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 151-164, April.
    3. Krivonozhko, Vladimir E. & Førsund, Finn R. & Lychev, Andrey V., 2012. "Identifying Suspicious Efficient Units in DEA Models," Memorandum 30/2012, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    4. Amin Mostafaee & Sevan Sohraiee, 2019. "The role of hyperplanes for characterizing suspicious units in DEA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 275(2), pages 531-549, April.
    5. Amin Mostafaee & Majid Soleimani-Damaneh, 2016. "Some Conditions for Characterizing Anchor Points," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(02), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Dariush Akbarian & Ali Akbar Bani & Mohsen Rostamy-Malkhalifeh & Farhad Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, 2022. "An algorithm for the anchor points of the PPS of the BCC model," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Vladimir Krivonozhko & Finn Førsund & Andrey Lychev, 2012. "Returns-to-scale properties in DEA models: the fundamental role of interior points," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 121-130, October.
    8. Thanassoulis, Emmanuel & Kortelainen, Mika & Allen, Rachel, 2012. "Improving envelopment in Data Envelopment Analysis under variable returns to scale," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 175-185.
    9. Alexander P. Afanasiev & Vladimir E. Krivonozhko & Andrey V. Lychev & Oleg V. Sukhoroslov, 2020. "Multidimensional frontier visualization based on optimization methods using parallel computations," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 563-574, March.
    10. Soleimani-damaneh, Majid & Mostafaee, Amin, 2015. "Identification of the anchor points in FDH models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 936-943.
    11. Victor V. Podinovski & Finn R. Førsund, 2010. "Differential Characteristics of Efficient Frontiers in Data Envelopment Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(6), pages 1743-1754, December.
    12. Mehdiloo, Mahmood & Podinovski, Victor V., 2021. "Strong, weak and Farrell efficient frontiers of technologies satisfying different production assumptions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 295-311.
    13. Sahoo, Biresh K & Khoveyni, Mohammad & Eslami, Robabeh & Chaudhury, Pradipta, 2016. "Returns to scale and most productive scale size in DEA with negative data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 255(2), pages 545-558.
    14. Victor V. Podinovski & Robert G. Chambers & Kazim Baris Atici & Iryna D. Deineko, 2016. "Marginal Values and Returns to Scale for Nonparametric Production Frontiers," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 236-250, February.
    15. Mostafaee, A. & Soleimani-damaneh, M., 2014. "Identifying the anchor points in DEA using sensitivity analysis in linear programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(1), pages 383-388.
    16. Soteriou, Andreas C. & Zenios, Stavros A., 1999. "Using data envelopment analysis for costing bank products," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 234-248, April.
    17. Adel Hatami-Marbini & Zahra Ghelej Beigi & Jens Leth Hougaard & Kobra Gholami, 2014. "Estimating Returns to Scale in Imprecise Data Envelopment Analysis," MSAP Working Paper Series 07_2014, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    18. K. Tone & M. Tsutsui, 2015. "How to Deal with Non-Convex Frontiers in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1002-1028, September.
    19. Cesaroni, Giovanni & Kerstens, Kristiaan & Van de Woestyne, Ignace, 2017. "Global and local scale characteristics in convex and nonconvex nonparametric technologies: A first empirical exploration," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 576-586.
    20. Stefan Seifert, 2016. "Semi-Parametric Measures of Scale Characteristics of German Natural Gas-Fired Electricity Generation," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1571, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    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:spr:annopr:v:250:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-015-1875-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.