IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v309y2023i3p1183-1200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visualization-aided multi-criteria decision-making using interpretable self-organizing maps

Author

Listed:
  • Yadav, Deepanshu
  • Nagar, Deepak
  • Ramu, Palaniappan
  • Deb, Kalyanmoy

Abstract

In multi-criterion optimization, decision-makers (DMs) are not often interested in the complete Pareto-optimal front. Instead, they have preferences favoring specific parts of the front. Multi-criterion decision-making (MCDM) literature provides a plethora of approaches for introducing DM’s preference information in an interactive manner to solve multi-criterion optimization problems. Interactions with DMs can be aided with a user-friendly visualization method or by using special data analysis procedures. An earlier study has indicated the use of self-organizing maps (SOM) as a tool for analyzing Pareto-optimal solutions. In this paper, we demonstrate how a specific MCDM method – NIMBUS – can be executed with the interpretable SOM (iSOM) approach iteratively to arrive at one or more preferred solutions. A visual illustration of the entire high-dimensional search space into multiple reduced two-dimensional spaces allows DMs to have a better understanding of the interactions of the objectives and constraints independently, and execute the NIMBUS decision-making procedure with a more wholistic approach. The paper demonstrates the proposed method on a number of multi- and many-objective numerical and engineering problems. The approach is now ready to be integrated with other popular MCDM methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Yadav, Deepanshu & Nagar, Deepak & Ramu, Palaniappan & Deb, Kalyanmoy, 2023. "Visualization-aided multi-criteria decision-making using interpretable self-organizing maps," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(3), pages 1183-1200.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:309:y:2023:i:3:p:1183-1200
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2023.01.062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221723001145
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.01.062?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. Kaliszewski, Ignacy & Miroforidis, Janusz & Podkopaev, Dmitry, 2012. "Interactive Multiple Criteria Decision Making based on preference driven Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization with controllable accuracy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 216(1), pages 188-199.
    2. Sinha, Ankur & Korhonen, Pekka & Wallenius, Jyrki & Deb, Kalyanmoy, 2014. "An interactive evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithm with a limited number of decision maker calls," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 233(3), pages 674-688.
    3. Miettinen, Kaisa & Makela, Marko M., 2006. "Synchronous approach in interactive multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(3), pages 909-922, May.
    4. Markus Hartikainen & Kaisa Miettinen & Margaret Wiecek, 2012. "PAINT: Pareto front interpolation for nonlinear multiobjective optimization," Computational Optimization and Applications, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 845-867, July.
    5. Wang, Rui & Purshouse, Robin C. & Fleming, Peter J., 2015. "Preference-inspired co-evolutionary algorithms using weight vectors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(2), pages 423-441.
    6. K Miettinen & M M Mäkelä, 1999. "Comparative evaluation of some interactive reference point-based methods for multi-objective optimisation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 50(9), pages 949-959, September.
    7. Branke, Juergen & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman & Zielniewicz, Piotr, 2016. "Using Choquet integral as preference model in interactive evolutionary multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(3), pages 884-901.
    8. Pekka Korhonen & Guang Yuan Yu, 2000. "Quadratic Pareto Race," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Yong Shi & Milan Zeleny (ed.), New Frontiers Of Decision Making For The Information Technology Era, chapter 7, pages 123-142, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Kalyanmoy Deb & Kaisa Miettinen, 2010. "Nadir Point Estimation Using Evolutionary Approaches: Better Accuracy and Computational Speed Through Focused Search," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Matthias Ehrgott & Boris Naujoks & Theodor J. Stewart & Jyrki Wallenius (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Making for Sustainable Energy and Transportation Systems, pages 339-354, Springer.
    10. Ma, Jian & Fan, Zhi-Ping & Huang, Li-Hua, 1999. "A subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(2), pages 397-404, January.
    11. Ho, William & Xu, Xiaowei & Dey, Prasanta K., 2010. "Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(1), pages 16-24, April.
    12. Wang, Rui & Purshouse, Robin C. & Giagkiozis, Ioannis & Fleming, Peter J., 2015. "The iPICEA-g: a new hybrid evolutionary multi-criteria decision making approach using the brushing technique," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(2), pages 442-453.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Guozheng Li & Rui Wang & Tao Zhang & Mengjun Ming, 2018. "Multi-Objective Optimal Design of Renewable Energy Integrated CCHP System Using PICEA-g," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Mengjun Ming & Rui Wang & Yabing Zha & Tao Zhang, 2017. "Multi-Objective Optimization of Hybrid Renewable Energy System Using an Enhanced Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Kathrin Klamroth & Kaisa Miettinen, 2008. "Integrating Approximation and Interactive Decision Making in Multicriteria Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 222-234, February.
    4. Luda Zhao & Bin Wang & Congyong Shen, 2021. "A multi-objective scheduling method for operational coordination time using improved triangular fuzzy number representation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-31, June.
    5. Hartikainen, Markus & Miettinen, Kaisa & Klamroth, Kathrin, 2019. "Interactive Nonconvex Pareto Navigator for multiobjective optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 238-251.
    6. I. Kaliszewski & J. Miroforidis, 2018. "On upper approximations of Pareto fronts," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 72(3), pages 475-490, November.
    7. Wang, Rui & Li, Guozheng & Ming, Mengjun & Wu, Guohua & Wang, Ling, 2017. "An efficient multi-objective model and algorithm for sizing a stand-alone hybrid renewable energy system," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 2288-2299.
    8. He, Li-Jun & Ju, Xue-Wei & Zhang, Wei-Bo, 2018. "A fitness assignment strategy based on the grey and entropy parallel analysis and its application to MOEAAuthor-Name: Zhu, Guang-Yu," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(3), pages 813-828.
    9. F Ruiz & M Luque & J M Cabello, 2009. "A classification of the weighting schemes in reference point procedures for multiobjective programming," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(4), pages 544-553, April.
    10. Pradip Kundu, 2021. "A multi-objective reliability-redundancy allocation problem with active redundancy and interval type-2 fuzzy parameters," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 2433-2458, December.
    11. I. Kaliszewski & J. Miroforidis, 2021. "Cooperative multiobjective optimization with bounds on objective functions," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 369-385, February.
    12. Ruiz, Ana B. & Sindhya, Karthik & Miettinen, Kaisa & Ruiz, Francisco & Luque, Mariano, 2015. "E-NAUTILUS: A decision support system for complex multiobjective optimization problems based on the NAUTILUS method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 218-231.
    13. Francisco Ruiz & Mariano Luque & Kaisa Miettinen, 2012. "Improving the computational efficiency in a global formulation (GLIDE) for interactive multiobjective optimization," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 47-70, August.
    14. Tim Chen & Hendri Daleanu & Chi-Huey Wong* & J.C.-Y. Chen, 2019. "Mathematical Derives of Evolutionary Algorithms for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Sumerianz Journal of Scientific Research, Sumerianz Publication, vol. 2(1), pages 5-11, 01-2019.
    15. El Mehdi, Er Raqabi & Ilyas, Himmich & Nizar, El Hachemi & Issmaïl, El Hallaoui & François, Soumis, 2023. "Incremental LNS framework for integrated production, inventory, and vessel scheduling: Application to a global supply chain," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    16. Xu, Xiaozhan, 2004. "A note on the subjective and objective integrated approach to determine attribute weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 156(2), pages 530-532, July.
    17. Jianxiong Zhang & Lin Feng & Wansheng Tang, 2014. "Optimal Contract Design of Supplier-Led Outsourcing Based on Pontryagin Maximum Principle," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 592-607, May.
    18. Scott, James & Ho, William & Dey, Prasanta K. & Talluri, Srinivas, 2015. "A decision support system for supplier selection and order allocation in stochastic, multi-stakeholder and multi-criteria environments," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 226-237.
    19. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    20. Ventura, José A. & Bunn, Kevin A. & Venegas, Bárbara B. & Duan, Lisha, 2021. "A coordination mechanism for supplier selection and order quantity allocation with price-sensitive demand and finite production rates," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).

    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:309:y:2023:i:3:p:1183-1200. 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.