| 研究生: |
許世豪 Hsu, Shih-hao |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
模糊環境二階段群體TOPSIS決策流程構建 Construction of Two-Stage Group Decision-Making TOPSIS Process under Fuzzy Environment |
| 指導教授: |
陳梁軒
Chen, Liang-hsuan |
| 學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
| 系所名稱: |
管理學院 - 工業與資訊管理學系 Department of Industrial and Information Management |
| 論文出版年: | 2008 |
| 畢業學年度: | 96 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 85 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 理想解相似度順序偏好法 、多屬性決策 、模糊集合理論 、滿意度 、群體決策 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | fuzzy sets theory, TOPSIS, MADM, group decision-making, satisfaction degree |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:164 下載:3 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
理想解相似度順序偏好法(Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution;TOPSIS)是一項用來處理多屬性決策問題的工具,透過明確性資料與距離的衡量對可行方案作出排序。但決策通常包含主觀的偏好,明確性資料無法完全適用於現實生活中的問題,且屬性評估值並非能夠完整呈現決策者內心真實的感受,而隨著決策的範圍擴大,過去一位決策者分析決斷的模式已漸漸不敷使用,另外模糊數之間的距離衡量眾說紛紜,沒有適當合理的衡量方式。針對上述問題,本研究在多屬性決策問題中加入群體決策與模糊集合理論的概念,建構出模糊環境下兩階段的群體決策之TOPSIS流程。第一階段中考慮模糊評估值以及各決策者的滿意度函數,再以類似群體投票的方式對方案作篩選,加強後續決策之品質;第二階段中考慮模糊數之距離衡量,求出方案的接近係數(closeness coefficient)後,再配合決策者的決策權重以加權平均的方式整合後再進行排序。此流程能夠呈現決策者主觀感受的滿意度值,打破傳統TOPSIS中屬性績效值單調遞增遞減的限制,以模糊評估值處理資訊不明確的狀況,並修正模糊數距離衡量的方式,使結果較為合理而有根據,另外加入了群體商議的過程,使決策結果較完整與周延。本研究以人力資源招募的例子,演算流程的每個步驟並求出排序結果,再與Shih et al.(2007)所提出之流程進行比較與分析,驗證本研究流程之優勢與彈性。
“Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution;TOPSIS” is a useful tool for dealing with multi-attribute decision-making (MADM) problems. It can analyze and determine the ranking for all the alternatives based on crisp data and distance measurements. However, decision-making usually includes subjective preferences, and the decision maker’s real feelings can’t be completely revealed with performance ratings. When the scope of decision-making broadens, relying on only one decision maker’s judgment is deficient. In addition, the distance measurement of fuzzy data is not calculated reasonably. To address these problems, we add group decision-making and fuzzy sets theory into multi-attribute decision-making and construct a two-stage group decision-making TOPSIS process under a fuzzy environment. This decision process not only reveals decision makers’ subjective satisfaction degrees, but also breaks the restriction of monotonically increasing and decreasing performances. Moreover, it includes fuzzy ratings to deal with ambiguous situations and modifies the distance measure of fuzzy numbers to make the calculations more reasonable. We also add a group discussion process to make the results even more complete. Finally, a numerical example is performed using the proposed the decision-making process to demonstrate its superiority and flexibility compared to other processes.
Bellman, R. E. and Zadeh, L. A., “Decision making in a fuzzy environment,” Management Science, 17, 141-164, 1970.
Bogetoft, P. and Pruzan, P., Planning with Multiple Criteria, Investigation, Communication, Choice, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1991.
Buckley, J. J., “Ranking alternatives. Using fuzzy numbers,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 15, 21-31, 1985.
Bui, T. X., Co-oP: A group decision support system for cooperative multiple criteria group decision making, Springer, Berlin, 1987.
Bui, T. X. and Jarke, M., “Communications design for co-oP: A group decision support system,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 4, 81-103, 1986.
Chen, C. T., “Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, 1-9, 2000.
Chen, S. J., Hwang, C. L. and Hwang, F. P., Fuzzy Multiple Attribute Decision Making Methods and Applications, Springer, New York, 1992.
Choi, H. A., Suh, E. H. and Suh, C. K., “Analytic hierarchy process: It can work for group decision support systems,” Computers and Industrial Engineering, 27, 167-171, 1994.
Chu, T. C. and Lin, Y. C., “A fuzzy TOPSIS method for robot selection,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 21, 284-290, 2003.
Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H. And Gustafson, D. H., Group Techniques for Programming Planning : A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes, Scott, Foresman, Illinois, 1975.
Delgado, M., Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Martinez, L., “Combining numerical and linguistic information in group decision making,” Information Sciences, 107, 177-194, 1998.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., “Operations on fuzzy numbers,” International Journal of Systems Science, 9, 613-626, 1978.
Ghyym, S. H., “A semi-linguistic fuzzy approach to multi-actor decision-making:application to aggregation of experts’ judgments,” Annals of Nuclear Energy, 26, 1097-1112, 1999.
Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E. and Martinez, L., “A fusion approach for managing multi-granularity linguistic term sets in decision making,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114, 43-58, 2000.
Hsu, H. M., and Chen, C. T., “Fuzzy credibility relation method for multiple criteria decision making problems,” Information Science, 96, 79-91, 1997.
Hwang, C. L. and Lin, M. J., Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K., Multiple Attributes Decision Making: Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 1981.
Jahanshahloo, G. R., Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. and Izadikhah, M., “An algorithm method to extend TOPSIS for decision-making problems with interval data,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175, 1375-1384, 2005.
Jahanshahloo, G. R., Hosseinzadeh Lotfi, F. and Izadikhah, M., “Extension of the TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, 181, 1544-1551, 2006.
Jarke, M., “Knowledge sharing and negotiation support in multiperson decision support systems,” Decision Support Systems, 2, 93-102, 1986.
Jelassi, T., Kersten, G. and Zionts, S., An introduction to group decision and negotiation support. In: Carlos, A. Banae Costa(Ed.), Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, Springer, Berlin, 1990.
Kahraman, C., G. and Ates, N. Y., “A two phase multi-attribute decision-making approach for new product introduction,” Information Sciences, 177, 1567-1582, 2007.
Kaufmann, A. and Gupta, M. M., Fuzzy Mathematical Models in Engineering and Management Science, North-Holland, 1988.
Klir, G. J. and Yuan, B., Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications. Prentice Hall, Taiwan, 1995.
Liang, G. S., “Fuzzy MCDM based on ideal and anti-ideal concepts,” European Journal of Operation Research, 112, 682-691, 1999.
Milani, A. S., Shanian, A. and Madoliat, R., “The effect of normalization norms in multiple attribute decision making model: A case study in gear material selection,” Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 29, 312-318, 2005.
Negi, D. S., Fuzzy analysis and optimization, Ph. D. Thesis, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kansas State University, 1989.
Noori, H., “The design of an integrated group decision support system for technology assessment,” R&D Management, 25, 309-322, 1995.
Robbins, S. P. and Coulter, M., Management, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1999.
Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
Shih, H. S., Shyur, H. J. and Lee, E.S., “An extension of TOPSIS for group decision making,” Mathematical and Computer Modeling, 45, 801-813, 2007.
Shih, H. S., Wang, C. H. and Lee, E.S., “A multiattribute GDSS for aiding problem-solving,” Mathematical and Computer Modeling, 39, 1397-1412, 2004.
Tsaur, S. H., Chang, T. Y. and Yen, C. H., “The evaluation of airline service quality by fuzzy MCDM,” Tourism Management, 23, 107-115, 2002.
Turban, E., Decision Support Systems and Expert Systems: Managerial Perspectives, Macmillan, New York, 1988.
Vincke, P., Multicriteria Decision-Aid, John Wiley, Chichester, 1992.
Wang, Y. J. and Lee, H. S., “Generalizing TOPSIS for fuzzy multiple-criteria group decision-making,” Computers and Mathematics with Applications, 53, 1762-1772, 2007.
Wang, Y. M. and Elhag, T. M.S., “Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment,” Expert Systems with Applications, 31, 309-319, 2006.
Yager, R. R. and Filev, D. P., Essentials of Fuzzy Modeling and Control, Wiley, New York, 1994.
Zadeh, L. A., “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Control, 8, 338-353, 1965.