IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v294y2021i1p16-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating solutions and solution sets under multiple objectives

Author

Listed:
  • Karakaya, G.
  • Köksalan, M.

Abstract

In this study we address evaluating solutions and solution sets that are defined by multiple objectives based on a function. Although any function can be used, we focus on mostly weighted Tchebycheff functions that can be used for a variety of purposes when multiple objectives are considered. One such use is to approximate a decision maker’s preferences with a Tchebycheff utility function. Different solutions can be evaluated in terms of expected utility conditional on weight values. Another possible use is to evaluate a set of solutions that approximate a Pareto set. It is not straightforward to find the Pareto set, especially for large-size multi-objective combinatorial optimization problems. To measure the representation quality of approximate Pareto sets and to compare such sets with each other, there are some performance indicators such as the hypervolume measure, the ε indicator, and the integrated preference functional (IPF) measure. A Tchebycheff function based IPF measure can be used to estimate how well a set of solutions represents the Pareto set. We develop the necessary theory to practically evaluate solutions and solution sets. We develop a general algorithm and demonstrate it for two, three, and four objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Karakaya, G. & Köksalan, M., 2021. "Evaluating solutions and solution sets under multiple objectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 16-28.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:294:y:2021:i:1:p:16-28
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221721000230
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2021.01.021?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. Kim, B. & Gel, E.S. & Fowler, J.W. & Carlyle, W.M. & Wallenius, J., 2006. "Evaluation of nondominated solution sets for k-objective optimization problems: An exact method and approximations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 173(2), pages 565-582, September.
    2. Karakaya, G. & Köksalan, M. & Ahipaşaoğlu, S.D., 2018. "Interactive algorithms for a broad underlying family of preference functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 248-262.
    3. Bilge Bozkurt & John W. Fowler & Esma S. Gel & Bosun Kim & Murat Köksalan & Jyrki Wallenius, 2010. "Quantitative Comparison of Approximate Solution Sets for Multicriteria Optimization Problems with Weighted Tchebycheff Preference Function," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 650-659, June.
    4. Robert F. Dell & Mark H. Karwan, 1990. "An interactive MCDM weight space reduction method utilizing a tchebycheff utility function," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 263-277, April.
    5. Banu Lokman & Murat Köksalan & Pekka J. Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius, 2016. "An interactive algorithm to find the most preferred solution of multi-objective integer programs," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 67-95, October.
    6. Holzmann, Tim & Smith, J.C., 2018. "Solving discrete multi-objective optimization problems using modified augmented weighted Tchebychev scalarizations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 436-449.
    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. Stephan Helfrich & Tyler Perini & Pascal Halffmann & Natashia Boland & Stefan Ruzika, 2023. "Analysis of the weighted Tchebycheff weight set decomposition for multiobjective discrete optimization problems," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 417-440, June.

    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. Stephan Helfrich & Tyler Perini & Pascal Halffmann & Natashia Boland & Stefan Ruzika, 2023. "Analysis of the weighted Tchebycheff weight set decomposition for multiobjective discrete optimization problems," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 417-440, June.
    2. Karakaya, G. & Köksalan, M., 2023. "Finding preferred solutions under weighted Tchebycheff preference functions for multi-objective integer programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 308(1), pages 215-228.
    3. Nasim Nasrabadi & Akram Dehnokhalaji & Pekka Korhonen & Jyrki Wallenius, 2019. "Using convex preference cones in multiple criteria decision making and related fields," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(6), pages 699-717, August.
    4. Bashir Bashir & Özlem Karsu, 2022. "Solution approaches for equitable multiobjective integer programming problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 967-995, April.
    5. Karakaya, G. & Köksalan, M. & Ahipaşaoğlu, S.D., 2018. "Interactive algorithms for a broad underlying family of preference functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(1), pages 248-262.
    6. Bilge Bozkurt & John W. Fowler & Esma S. Gel & Bosun Kim & Murat Köksalan & Jyrki Wallenius, 2010. "Quantitative Comparison of Approximate Solution Sets for Multicriteria Optimization Problems with Weighted Tchebycheff Preference Function," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 58(3), pages 650-659, June.
    7. Tsionas, Mike G., 2019. "Multi-objective optimization using statistical models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(1), pages 364-378.
    8. Tim Holzmann & J. Cole Smith, 2019. "Shortest path interdiction problem with arc improvement recourse: A multiobjective approach," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 66(3), pages 230-252, April.
    9. Neuvonen, Lauri & Wildemeersch, Matthias & Vilkkumaa, Eeva, 2023. "Supporting strategy selection in multiobjective decision problems under uncertainty and hidden requirements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(1), pages 279-293.
    10. Anderson Kenji Hirose & Cassius Tadeu Scarpin & José Eduardo Pécora Junior, 2020. "Goal programming approach for political districting in Santa Catarina State: Brazil," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 287(1), pages 209-232, April.
    11. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2000. "A multi-criteria agency model with incomplete preference information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 152-165, October.
    12. Özlem Karsu & Hale Erkan, 2020. "Balance in resource allocation problems: a changing reference approach," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 42(1), pages 297-326, March.
    13. Zhang, Xingmin & Zhang, Shuai, 2021. "Optimal time-varying tail risk network with a rolling window approach," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 580(C).
    14. Argyris, Nikolaos & Karsu, Özlem & Yavuz, Mirel, 2022. "Fair resource allocation: Using welfare-based dominance constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(2), pages 560-578.
    15. Wassila Drici & Fatma Zohra Ouail & Mustapha Moulaï, 2018. "Optimizing a linear fractional function over the integer efficient set," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 135-151, August.
    16. Chi-Yo Huang & Jih-Jeng Huang & You-Ning Chang & Yen-Chu Lin, 2021. "A Fuzzy-MOP-Based Competence Set Expansion Method for Technology Roadmap Definitions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, January.
    17. Sun, Minghe, 2005. "Some issues in measuring and reporting solution quality of interactive multiple objective programming procedures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(2), pages 468-483, April.
    18. M Köksalan & E Karasakal, 2006. "An interactive approach for multiobjective decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 532-540, May.
    19. Korotkov, Vladimir & Wu, Desheng, 2021. "Benchmarking project portfolios using optimality thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    20. Salo, Ahti & Andelmin, Juho & Oliveira, Fabricio, 2022. "Decision programming for mixed-integer multi-stage optimization under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 550-565.

    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:294:y:2021:i:1:p:16-28. 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.