Features in Formulating and Solving Decision Problems – Sensitivity Analysis

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter starts with the formulation of a case containing enough information to illustrate the construction of the decision matrix and problem solving. Probably the most valuable feature of this example is the thorough analysis performed when using several objective functions. The idea is to demonstrate the wealth of infor­mation that can be extracted from the model and how it can detect if there have been shortcomings in establishing the mathematical model. It also reveals how the information provided can help the DM in making clear that some concepts are worth reviewing in the light of information that cast a doubt about early stage concepts. It finalizes with analysis of how weights assigned to the diverse objectives may affect the solution.

Keywords

Decision problems Supporting the decision maker Weights importance Pay-off matrix Requests from the Decision maker 

References

  1. *  Chankong, V., & Haimes, Y. (1983). Multiobjective decision making – Theory and methodology. New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
  2. *  Forman, H., & Selly, M. (2001). Decision by objectives. How to convince others that you are right. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. *  French, S. (1988). Decision theory: An introduction to the mathematics of rationality. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.Google Scholar
  4. *  Hobbs, B., & Horn, G. (1997). Building public confidence in energy planning: A multimethod MCDM approach to demand-side planning at BC Gas. Energy Policy, 25(3), 357–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *  Korhonen, P., Moskowitz, H., & Wallenius, J. (1992). Multiple criteria decision support – A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 63, 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kumar, S., Hanna, A., Natarayan, P. (2003). Application of fuzzy linear programming in construction projects. International Journal of IT in Architecture, Engineering and Construction (IT-AEC), 4(1), 265–274. Chimay Anumba (Ed.)Google Scholar
  7. *  Luce, R., & Raffia, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. *  Maino, M., Pittet, D., Kobrich, G., Claus, G. (1993). Un instrumento para el diseño de sistemas de producción. Santiago de Chile: Centro Latinoamericano para el Desarrollo Rural (RIMISP).Google Scholar
  9. *  Mészáros, C., & Rapcsák, T. (1996). On sensitivity analysis for a class of decision systems. Decision Support Systems, 16, 231–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. *  Ríos, S. (1980). Decisiones multicriterio con ordenaciones parciales. Tesis doctoral, Editorial de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid.Google Scholar
  11. *  Romero, C. (1981). El enfoque multiobjetivo en los modelos matemáticos de planificación de cultivos. Revista de Economía Política, 789, 179–204.Google Scholar
  12. *  Romero, C. (1996). Análisis de las decisiones multicriterio. Madrid: Isdefe.Google Scholar
  13. *  Indicates suggested reading material not mentioned in text.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations