Interactive Multi-Objective Programming and its Applications
Many practical problems often have several objectives conflicting with each other, and we need to make the balanced decision from the total view point. For these problems, the traditional mathematical programming is not valid, and instead the multi-objective programming have been developed. Among them, the aspiration level approach has been widely recognized to be effective in many practical fields.
In this paper, some of techniques based on aspiration levels are discussed along with a device for the automatic trade-off using parametric optimization techniques. Some practical examples show that the methods are user—friendly and ‘synayakana’ in Japanese (i.e., flexible and robust, in English) to the multiplicity of value judgement.
KeywordsDecision Maker Aspiration Level Pareto Solution Multiobjective Programming Cable Tension
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Grauer, M., Lewandowski, A. and Wierzbicki A.P. (1984), DIDASS Theory, Implementation and Experiences, in M. Grauer and A.P. Wierzbicki (eds.) Interactive Decision Analysis, Proceedings of an International Workshop on Interactive Decision Analysis and Interpretative Computer Intelligence, Springer: 22–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ishido, K., Nakayama, H., Furukawa, K., Inoue, K. and Tanikawa, K. (1987). Management of Erection for Cable Stayed Bridge using Satisficing Trade-off method, in Y. Sawaragi, K. Inoue and H. Nakayama (eds.) Toward Interactive and Intelligent Decision Support Systems, Springer: 304–312.Google Scholar
- Kallio, M., Lewandowski, A. and Orchard-Hays, W. (1980), An Implementation of the Reference Point Approach of Multiobjective Optimization, WP-80–35, IIASAGoogle Scholar
- Kito, N. and Misumi, M. (1978), An Application of Goal Programming to Cement Production, Communications of the Operations Research Society of Japan 23, 177–181.Google Scholar
- Korhonen, P. and Wallenius, J. (1987). A Pareto Race, Working Paper F-180, Helsinki School of Economics, also Naval Research Logistics (1988)Google Scholar
- Nakayama, H. (1984), Proposal of Satisficing Trade-off Method for Multi- objective Programming, Transact. SICE, 20: 29–35Google Scholar
- Nakayama, H. and Sawaragi, Y. (1984). Satisficing Trade-off Method for Interactive Multiobjective Programming Methods, in M. Grauer and A.P. Wierzbicki (eds.) Interactive Decision Analysis, Proceedings of an International Workshop on Interactive Decision Analysis and Interpretative Computer Intelligence, Springer: 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nakayama, H. (1988), Satisficing Trade—off Method for Problems with Multiple Linear Fractional Objectives and its Applications, presented at the International Conference on Multiobjective Problems in Mathematical Programming, Yalta/USSR, October 1988.Google Scholar
- Nakayama, H. (1989), An Interactive Support System for Bond Trading, in A. G. Lockett and G. Islei (eds.) Improving Decision Making in Organizations, Springer, 325–333Google Scholar
- Nakayama, H. (1990), Trade—off Analysis using Parametric Optimization Techniques, Research Report 90–1, Dept. Appl. Math., Konan UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Sawaragi, Y., Nakayama, H. and Tanino, T. (1985). Theory of Multiobje-ctive Optimization, Academic PressGoogle Scholar
- Ueno, N., Nakagawa, Y., Tokuyama, H., Nakayama, H. and Tamura, H., A Multi—objective Planning for String Selection in Steel Manufactureing, submitted for publicationGoogle Scholar
- Wierzbicki, A. P. (1981), A Mathematical Basis for Satisficing Decision Making, in J. Morse (ed.), Organizations: Multiple Agents with Multiple Criteria, Springer: 465–485.Google Scholar