IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/cejnor/v18y2010i3p383-396.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sensitivity analysis incorporating fuzzy evaluation for scaling constants of multiattribute utility functions

Author

Listed:
  • Ichiro Nishizaki
  • Hideki Katagiri
  • Tomohiro Hayashida

Abstract

A multiattribute utility function can be represented by a function of single-attribute utility functions if the decision maker’s preference satisfies additive independence or mutually utility independence. Additive independence is a preference condition stronger than mutually utility independence, and the multiattribute utility function is in the additive form if the former condition is satisfied, otherwise it is in the multiplicative form. In this paper, we propose a method for sensitivity analysis of multiattribute utility functions in multiplicative form, taking into account the imprecision of the decision maker’s judgment in the procedures for determining scaling constants (attribute weights). Copyright Springer-Verlag 2010

Suggested Citation

  • Ichiro Nishizaki & Hideki Katagiri & Tomohiro Hayashida, 2010. "Sensitivity analysis incorporating fuzzy evaluation for scaling constants of multiattribute utility functions," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(3), pages 383-396, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:cejnor:v:18:y:2010:i:3:p:383-396
    DOI: 10.1007/s10100-009-0115-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10100-009-0115-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10100-009-0115-1?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. Ralph L. Keeney & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1994. "Managing Nuclear Waste from Power Plants," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 107-130, February.
    2. Wolters, W. T. M. & Mareschal, B., 1995. "Novel types of sensitivity analysis for additive MCDM methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 281-290, March.
    3. Butler, John & Jia, Jianmin & Dyer, James, 1997. "Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 531-546, December.
    4. Hutton Barron & Charles P. Schmidt, 1988. "Sensitivity Analysis of Additive Multiattribute Value Models," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 122-127, February.
    5. Bertrand Mareschal & Jean Pierre Brans & Philippe Vincke, 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: the Prométhée method," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9307, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Brans, J. P. & Vincke, Ph. & Mareschal, B., 1986. "How to select and how to rank projects: The method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 228-238, February.
    7. Bana E Costa, Carlos A., 1988. "A methodology for sensitivity analysis in three-criteria problems: A case study in municipal management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 159-173, January.
    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. R. Pelissari & M. C. Oliveira & S. Ben Amor & A. Kandakoglu & A. L. Helleno, 2020. "SMAA methods and their applications: a literature review and future research directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 433-493, October.
    2. Ascough, J.C. & Maier, H.R. & Ravalico, J.K. & Strudley, M.W., 2008. "Future research challenges for incorporation of uncertainty in environmental and ecological decision-making," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 383-399.
    3. Agata Sielska, 2010. "Multicriteria rankings of open-end investment funds and their stability," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 20(1), pages 111-129.
    4. Hodgkin, Julie & Belton, Valerie & Koulouri, Anastasia, 2005. "Supporting the intelligent MCDA user: A case study in multi-person multi-criteria decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 160(1), pages 172-189, January.
    5. Luis C. Dias & Carolina Passeira & João Malça & Fausto Freire, 2022. "Integrating life-cycle assessment and multi-criteria decision analysis to compare alternative biodiesel chains," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(2), pages 1359-1374, May.
    6. Hayashida, Tomohiro & Nishizaki, Ichiro & Ueda, Yoshifumi, 2010. "Multiattribute utility analysis for policy selection and financing for the preservation of the forest," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(3), pages 833-843, February.
    7. Ioannis Kougkoulos & M. Selim Cakir & Nathan Kunz & Doreen S. Boyd & Alexander Trautrims & Kornilia Hatzinikolaou & Stefan Gold, 2021. "A Multi‐Method Approach to Prioritize Locations of Labor Exploitation for Ground‐Based Interventions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(12), pages 4396-4411, December.
    8. Angilella, Silvia & Giarlotta, Alfio & Lamantia, Fabio, 2010. "A linear implementation of PACMAN," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(2), pages 401-411, September.
    9. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    10. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    11. Yi Peng, 2015. "Regional earthquake vulnerability assessment using a combination of MCDM methods," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 234(1), pages 95-110, November.
    12. Guh, Yuh-Yuan, 1997. "Introduction to a new weighting method -- Hierarchy consistency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 215-226, October.
    13. Hajkowicz, Stefan, 2006. "Taking a closer look at multiple criteria analysis and economic evaluation," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139785, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    14. Meløn, Mønica García & Aragonés Beltran, Pablo & Carmen González Cruz, M., 2008. "An AHP-based evaluation procedure for Innovative Educational Projects: A face-to-face vs. computer-mediated case study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 754-765, October.
    15. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    17. Mulliner, Emma & Smallbone, Kieran & Maliene, Vida, 2013. "An assessment of sustainable housing affordability using a multiple criteria decision making method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 270-279.
    18. Roberto Cervelló Royo & Fernando García García & Francisco Guijarro-Martínez & Ismael Moya-Clemente, 2011. "Housing Ranking: a model of equilibrium between buyers and sellers expectations," ERSA conference papers ersa11p314, European Regional Science Association.
    19. Qian-Yun Tan & Cui-Ping Wei & Qi Liu & Xiang-Qian Feng, 2016. "The Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic TOPSIS Method Based on Novel Information Measures," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 33(05), pages 1-22, October.
    20. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.

    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:cejnor:v:18:y:2010:i:3:p:383-396. 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.