Abstract
We introduce a new way of utilizing preference information specified by the decision maker in interactive reference point based methods. A reference point consists of aspiration levels for each objective function. We take the desires of the decision maker into account more closely when projecting the reference point to become nondominated. In this way we can support the decision maker in finding the most satisfactory solutions faster. In practice, we adjust the weights in the achievement scalarizing function that projects the reference point. We demonstrate our idea with an example and we summarize results of computational tests that support the efficiency of the idea proposed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Benayoun R, de Montgolfier J, Tergny J, Laritchev O (1971) Linear programming with multiple objective functions: step method (STEM). Math Prog 1:366–375
Buchanan JT (1997) A naïve approach for solving MCDM problems: the GUESS method. J Oper Res Soc 48:202–206
Jaszkiewicz A, Slowiński R (1999) The ‘light beam search’ approach—an overview of methodology and applications. Eur J Oper Res 113:300–314
Korhonen P, Laakso J (1986) A visual interactive method for solving the multiple criteria problem. Eur J Oper Res 24:277–287
Luque M, Miettinen K, Eskelinen P, Ruiz F (2009) Incorporating Preference information in interactive reference point methods for multiobjective optimization. Omega 37: 450–462
Miettinen K (1999) Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. Kluwer, Boston
Miettinen K, Lotov AV, Kamenev GK, Berezkin VE (2003) Integration of two multiobjective optimization methods for nonlinear problems. Optim Meth Soft 18:63–80
Miettinen K, Mäkelä MM (1995) Interactive bundle-based method for nondifferentiable mul-tiobjective optimization: NIMBUS. Optimization 34:231–246
Miettinen K, Mäkelä MM (1999) Comparative evaluation of some interactive reference point based methods for multi-objective optimisation. J Oper Res Soc 50:949–959
Miettinen K, Mäkelä MM (2002) On scalarizing functions in multiobjective optimization. OR Spectrum 24:193–213
Miettinen K, Mäkelä MM (2006) Synchronous approach in interactive multiobjective optimization. Eur J Oper Res 170:909–922
Miettinen K, Mäkelä MM, Kaario K (2006) Experiments with classification-based scalarizing functions in interactive multiobjective optimization. Eur J Oper Res 175:931–947
Nakayama H, Sawaragi Y (1984) Satisficing Trade-off method for multiobjective programming. In: Grauer M, Wierzbicki AP (eds) Interactive decision analysis. Springer, Berlin, pp 113–122
Steuer RE (1986) Multiple criteria optimization: theory, computation, and application. Wiley, New York
Wierzbicki AP (1982) A Mathematical basis for satisficing decision making. Math Modell 3:391–405
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Miettinen, K., Eskelinen, P., Luque, M., Ruiz, F. (2009). On the Use of Preferential Weights in Interactive Reference Point Based Methods. In: Barichard, V., Ehrgott, M., Gandibleux, X., T'Kindt, V. (eds) Multiobjective Programming and Goal Programming. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, vol 618. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85646-7_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85646-7_20
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-85645-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-85646-7
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)