Advertisement

The Journal of Supercomputing

, Volume 71, Issue 7, pp 2397–2411 | Cite as

Evaluation efficiency of large-scale data set with negative data: an artificial neural network approach

  • Mehdi Toloo
  • Ameneh Zandi
  • Ali Emrouznejad
Article

Abstract

Data envelopment analysis (DEA) is the most widely used methods for measuring the efficiency and productivity of decision-making units (DMUs). The need for huge computer resources in terms of memory and CPU time in DEA is inevitable for a large-scale data set, especially with negative measures. In recent years, wide ranges of studies have been conducted in the area of artificial neural network and DEA combined methods. In this study, a supervised feed-forward neural network is proposed to evaluate the efficiency and productivity of large-scale data sets with negative values in contrast to the corresponding DEA method. Results indicate that the proposed network has some computational advantages over the corresponding DEA models; therefore, it can be considered as a useful tool for measuring the efficiency of DMUs with (large-scale) negative data.

Keywords

Artificial neural network Data envelopment analysis (DEA) SORM-DEA Negative data Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) LM-DEA 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The constructive comments and suggestions of the referees and Editor-in-Chief Professor Hamid R. Arabnia are highly appreciated. The research was supported by the Czech Science Foundation (GACR project 14-31593S), through European Social Fund within the project CZ.1.07/2.3.00/20.0296 and SP2014/111, an SGS project of Faculty of Economics, VŠB-Technical University of Ostrava.

References

  1. 1.
    Adeloye AJ, De Munari A (2006) Artificial neural network based generalized storage -yield -reliability models using the Levenberg -Marquardt algorithm. J Hydrol 326:215–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Athanassopoulos AD, Curram SP (1996) A comparison of data envelopment analysis and artificial neural networks as tools for assessing. JORS 47(8):100Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30(9):1078–1092zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bazaraa MS, Jarvis JJ, Sherali HD (2010) Linear programming and network flows, 4th edn. Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2:429–444zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper WW, Seiford LM, Tone K (2008) Introduction to data envelopment analysis and its uses, 3rd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Emrouznejad A, Shale E (2009) A combined neural network and DEA for measuring efficiency of large scale datasets. Comput Ind Eng 56:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emrouznejad A, Amin GR, Thanassoulis E, Anouze AL (2010b) On the boundedness of the SORM DEA models with negative data. Eur J Oper Res 206:265–268zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Emrouznejad A, Latef Anouze A (2010a) A semi-oriented radial measure for measuring the efficiency of decision making units with negative data, using DEA. Eu J Oper Res 200:297–304zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fethi MD, Pasiouras F (2009) Assessing bank efficiency and performance with operational research and artificial intelligence techniques: a survey. Eur J Oper Res 204(2):189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flammini F, Setola R, Franceschetti G (2013) Effective surveillance for homeland security balancing technology and social issues. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freeman JA, Skapura DM (1992) Neural network algorithms, applications, and programming techniques. Addison-Wesley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gutierrez E, Lozano S (2009) Data envelopment analysis of multiple response experiments. Appl Math Model 34(5):1139–1148MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hagan MT, Menhaj MB (1994) Training feed forward network with the Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 5(6):989–993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hatami-Marbini A, Emrouznejad A, Agrell PJ (2014) Interval data without sign restrictions in DEA. Appl Math Model 38:2028–2036MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kazemi Matin R, Amin GR, Emrouznejad A (2014) A modified semi-oriented radial measure for target setting with negative data. Measurement 54:152–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lovell CAK (1995) Measuring the macroeconomic performance of the Taiwanese economy. Int J Prod Econ 39:165–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McCulloch W, Pitts W (1943) A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull Math Biophys 5:115–133zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mostafa MM (2009) Modeling the efficiency of top Arab banks: a DEA-neural network approach. Expert Syst Appl 36:309–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nelles O (2001) Nonlinear system identification. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pastor JT (1994) How to discount environmental effects in DEA: an application to bank branches. Working paper no. 011/94, Depto. De Estadistica e Investigacion Operativa, Universidad de Alicante, SpainGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pendharkar PC, Rodger JA, Yaverbaum GJ, Herman N, Benner M (1999) Association, statistical, mathematical and neural approaches for mining breast cancer patterns. Expert Syst Appl 17:223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Portela MCAS, Thanassoulis E, Simpson G (2004) Negative data in DEA: a directional distance approach applied to bank branches free. J Oper Res Soc 55:1111–1121zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT (1990) Numerical Recipes, Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Principe JC, Euliano NR (2000) Neural and adaptive systems: fundamentals through simulations. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rumelhart DE, Hinton GE, Williams RJ (1986) Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323:533–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Seiford LM, Zhu J (2002) Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation. Eur J Oper Res 142:16–20zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    The MathWorks, MATLAB [Online]. http://www.mathworks.com
  29. 29.
    Toloo M, Masoumzadeh A, Barat M (2015) Finding an initial basic feasible solution for DEA models with an application on bank industry. Comput Econ 45:323–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wu D, Yang Z, Liang L (2006) Using DEA-neural network approach to evaluate branch efficiency of a large Canadian bank. Expert Syst Appl 31:108–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business Administration, Faculty of EconomicsTechnical University of OstravaOstrava 1Czech Republic
  2. 2.Young Researchers and Elite Club, Central Tehran BranchIslamic Azad UniversityTehranIran
  3. 3.Operation and Information Management, Aston Business SchoolAston UniversityBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations