Convergence of Interactive Procedures of Multiobjective Optimization and Decision Support

  • Andrzej P. Wierzbicki
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 465)


The paper presents an overview of issues of convergence of interactive procedures in multiobjective optimization and decision support. The issue of convergence itself depends on assumptions concerning the behavior of the decision maker — who, more specifically, is understood as a user of a decision support system. Known procedures with guaranteed convergence under classic assumptions are reviewed. Some effective procedures of accelerated practical convergence but without precise convergence proofs are recalled. An alternative approach to convergence based on an indifference threshold for increases of value functions or on outranking relations is proposed and illustrated by a new procedure called Outranking Trials.


multiobjective optimization decision support interactive procedures convergence 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Bogetoft, P., Å. Hallefjord and M. Kok (1988) On the convergence of reference point methods in multiobjective-programming. European Journal of Operations Research 34, 56–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Brans, J.P. and Ph. Vincke (1985) A preference ranking organization method. Management Science 31, 647–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Charnes, A. and W.W. Cooper (1977) Goal programming and multiple objective optimization. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 1 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Dinkelbach, W. and H. Isermann (1973) On decision making under multiple criteria and under incomplete information. In J.L. Cochrane, M. Zeleny (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Making. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia SC.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Ermolev, Yu., and R. J-B. Wets (1988) Numerical Techniques for Stochastic Optimization. Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Geoffrion, A.M., J.S. Dyer and A. Feinberg (1972) An Interactive Approach for Multicriterion Optimization, with an Application to the Operation of an Academic Department. Management Science 19, 357–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Granat, J and A.P. Wierzbicki (1994) Interactive Specification of DSS User Preferences in Terms of Fuzzy Sets. Working Paper of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, WP-94–29, Laxenburg, Austria.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Granat, J., T. Kręglewski, J. Paczyñski and A. Stachurski (1994) IAC-DIDAS-N++ Modular Modeling and Optimization System. Part I: Theoretical Foundations, Part II: Users Guide. Report of the Institute of Automatic Control, Warsaw University of Technology, March 1994, Warsaw, Poland.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Jaszkiewicz, A. and R. Slowiñski (1985) The LBS package — a microcomputer implementation of the Light Beam Search method for multi-objective nonlinear mathematical programming. Working Paper of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, WP-94–07, Laxenburg, Austria.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1982) The Psychology of Preferences. Scientific American 246 160–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Kaliszewski, I. (1994) Quantitative Pareto Analysis by Cone Separation Techniques. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Kok, M. and F.A. Lootsma (1985) Pairwise comparison methods in multiple objective programming. European Journal of Operational Research 22, 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Korhonen, P. and J. Laakso (1985) A Visual Interactive Method for Solving the Multiple Criteria Problem. European Journal of Operational Research 24 277–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Lewandowski, A. and A.P. Wierzbicki (1989), eds. Aspiration Based Decision Support Systems. Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems 331, Springer- Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Lootsma, F.A. (1993) Scale sensitivity in multiplicative AHP and SMART. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 2, 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Lootsma, F.A., T.W. Äthan and P.Y. Papalambros (1985) Controlling the Search for a Compromise Solution in Multi-Objective Optimization. To appear inGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Luenberger, D.G. (1973) Introduction to Linear and Nonlinear Programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Ma.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Michalevich, M.V. (1986) Stochastic approaches to interactive multicriteria optimizar tion problems. WP-86–10, IIASA, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Ogryczak, W., K. Studzinski and K. Zorychta (1989) A generalized reference point approach to multiobjective transshipment problem with facility location. In A. Lewandowski and A. Wierzbicki, eds.: Aspiration Based Decision Support Systems Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, 331, Springer-Verlag, Berlin- Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    Rios, S. (1994) Decision Theory and Decision Analysis: Trends and Challenges. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston-Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Roy, B. and Ph. Vincke (1981) Multicriteria Analysis: Survey and New Directions. European Journal of Operational Research 8, 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Saaty, T. (1980) The Analytical Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Sawaragi, Y., H. Nakayamaand, T. Tanino (1985) Theory of Multiobjective Optimization. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Steuer, R.E. and E.V. Choo (1983) An interactive weighted Tchebycheff procedure for multiple objective programming. Mathematical Programming 26, 326–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Steuer, R.E. (1986) Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application. J. Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Vincke, Ph. (1992) Multicriteria Decision Aid. J. Wiley, Chichester-New York.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Wierzbicki, A.P. (1980) The use of reference objectives in multiobjective optimization. In G. Fandel, T. Gal (eds.): Multiple Criteria Decision Making; Theory and Applications, Lecture Notes in Economic and Mathematical Systems 177, 468–486, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Wierzbicki, A.P. (1984) Models and Sensitivity of Control Systems. Elsevier-WNT, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Wierzbicki, A.P. (1986) On the completeness and constructiveness of parametric characterizations to vector optimization problems. OR-Spektrum, 8 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Wierzbicki, A.P. (1992a) The Role of Intuition and Creativity in Decision Making. WP-92–078, IIASA, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Wierzbicki, A.P. (1992b) Multiple Criteria Games: Theory and Applications. WP-92–079, IIASA, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Zeleny, M. (1974) A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Comput. Oper. Res. Vol 1, 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Zeleny, M. (1973) Compromise Programming. In J.L. Cochrane and M. Zeleny (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Making. University of Carolina Press, Columbia, SC.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Zionts, S. and J. Wallenius (1976) An Interactive Programming Method for Solving the Multicriteria Problem. Management Science 22 653–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    Zionts, S. and J. Wallenius (1983) An Interactive Multiple Objective Linear Programming Method for a Class of Underlying Nonlinear Utility Functions. Management Science 29 519–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrzej P. Wierzbicki
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of TelecommunicationsWarsawPoland
  2. 2.the Institute of Control and Computation EngineeringWarsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations