Robust optimization criteria: state-of-the-art and new issues

Uncertain parameters appear in many optimization problems raised by real-world applications. To handle such problems, several approaches to model uncertainty are available, such as stochastic programming and robust optimization. This study is focused on robust optimization, in particular, the criteria to select and determine a robust solution. We provide an overview on robust optimization criteria and introduce two new classifications criteria for measuring the robustness of both scenarios and solutions. They can be used independently or coupled with classical robust optimization criteria and could work as a complementary tool for intensification in local searches

An Approach to Evaluate a Supply Chain Network

Designing the supply chain network (SCN) is the first step to creating a chain sourcing for results. The process identifies the change that will differentiate an organization from its competitors, to contact a customer with a successful value proposition, reduce costs and boost profitability. The most effective way to ensure perfect fluidity is to appoint an employee responsible for supervising the entire process. The manager will inform and coordinate the activities of the heads of different departments, from shipping to sales, focusing on communication and identification of potential problems, as well as correcting faults before they lead to disruption. This paper proposes an evaluation approach for the supply chain network design problems under uncertainty. Existing approaches to this problem are either the deterministic environments or can only address a modest number of scenarios for the uncertain problem parameters. Our solution approach integrates both features; the collective evaluation and the selection of one

A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions

The Author(s) 2015. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support decisions in healthcare involving multiple and conflicting criteria. Although uncertainty is usually carefully addressed in health eco-nomic evaluations, whether and how the different sources of uncertainty are dealt with and with what methods in MCDA is less known. The objective of this study is to review how uncertainty can be explicitly taken into account in MCDA and to discuss which approach may be appro-priate for healthcare decision makers. A literature review was conducted in the Scopus and PubMed databases. Two reviewers independently categorized studies according to research areas, the type of MCDA used, and the approach used to quantify uncertainty. Selected full text articles wer

A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support decisions in healthcare involving multiple and conflicting criteria. Although uncertainty is usually carefully addressed in health economic evaluations, whether and how the different sources of uncertainty are dealt with and with what methods in MCDA is less known. The objective of this study is to review how uncertainty can be explicitly taken into account in MCDA and to discuss which approach may be appropriate for healthcare decision makers. A literature review was conducted in the Scopus and PubMed databases. Two reviewers independently categorized studies according to research areas, the type of MCDA used, and the approach used to quantify uncertainty. Selected full text articles were read for methodological details. The search strategy identified 569 studies. The five approaches most identified were fuzzy set theory (45 % of studies), probabilistic sensitivity analysis (15 %), deterministic sensitivity analysis (31 %), Bayesian framework (6 %), and grey theory (3 %). A large number of papers considered the analytic hierarchy process in combination with fuzzy set theory (31 %). Only 3 % of studies were published in healthcare-related journals. In conclusion, our review identified five different approaches to take uncertainty into account in MCDA. The deterministic approach is most likely sufficient for most healthcare policy decisions because of its low complexity and straightforward implementation. However, more complex approaches may be needed when multiple sources of uncertainty must be considered simultaneousl

Supporting multiattribute decisions in scenario planning using a simple method based on ranks

A neglected area of scenario planning is the provision of support for strategic decisions that involve multiple attributes. When the number of scenarios and attributes is large, conventional multiattribute decision analysis methods require the elicitation of a large number of values and weights, which can be demanding and time consuming for decision makers. This paper examines the effectiveness of using a simple approximation to the simple multiattribute rating method (SMART) that is based purely on the ranking of options and attributes. The method was tested on 250,000 simulated decision problems and was found to perform well when assessed on the basis of its hit rate (the percentage of times it identified the same best option as SMART) and the utility loss resulting from the approximation. In large problems, where simplifications are likely to be most useful, it outperformed an alternative approximation method, SMARTER, which is more complex to apply, and it was almost as effective as SMARTER on smaller problems

A decision rule based on goal programming and one-stage models for uncertain multi-criteria mixed decision making and games against nature

This paper is concerned with games against nature and multi-criteria decision making under uncertainty along with scenario planning. We focus on decision problems where a deterministic evaluation of criteria is not possible. The procedure we propose is based on weighted goal programming and may be applied when seeking a mixed strategy. A mixed strategy allows the decision maker to select and perform a weighted combination of several accessible alternatives. The new method takes into consideration the decision maker’s preference structure (importance of particular goals) and nature (pessimistic, moderate or optimistic attitude towards a given problem). It is designed for one-shot decisions made under uncertainty with unknown probabilities (frequencies), i.e. for decision making under complete uncertainty or decision making under strategic uncertainty. The procedure refers to one-stage models, i.e. models considering combinations of scenarios and criteria (scenario-criterion pairs) as distinct meta-attributes, which means that the novel approach can be used in the case of totally independent payoff matrices for particular targets. The algorithm does not require any information about frequencies, which is especially desirable for new decision problems. It can be successfully applied by passive decision makers, as only criteria weights and the coefficient of optimism have to be declared

A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions

The Author(s) 2015. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support decisions in healthcare involving multiple and conflicting criteria. Although uncertainty is usually carefully addressed in health eco-nomic evaluations, whether and how the different sources of uncertainty are dealt with and with what methods in MCDA is less known. The objective of this study is to review how uncertainty can be explicitly taken into account in MCDA and to discuss which approach may be appro-priate for healthcare decision makers. A literature review was conducted in the Scopus and PubMed databases. Two reviewers independently categorized studies according to research areas, the type of MCDA used, and the approach used to quantify uncertainty. Selected full text articles wer

Simulation-based multi-criteria decision making: an interactive method with a case study on infectious disease epidemics

Whenever a system needs to be operated by a central decision making authority in the presence of two or more conflicting goals, methods from multi-criteria decision making can help to resolve the trade-offs between these goals. In this work, we devise an interactive simulation-based methodology for planning and deciding in complex dynamic systems subject to multiple objectives and parameter uncertainty. The outline intermittently employs simulation models and global sensitivity analysis methods in order to facilitate the acquisition of system-related knowledge throughout the iterations. Moreover, the decision maker participates in the decision making process by interactively adjusting control variables and system parameters according to a guiding analysis question posed for each iteration. As a result, the overall decision making process is backed up by sensitivity analysis results providing increased confidence in terms of reliability of considered decision alternatives. Using the efficiency concept of Pareto optimality and the sensitivity analysis method of Sobol’ sensitivity indices, the methodology is then instantiated in a case study on planning and deciding in an infectious disease epidemic situation similar to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Results show that the presented simulation-based methodology is capable of successfully addressing issues such as system dynamics, parameter uncertainty, and multi-criteria decision making. Hence, it represents a viable tool for supporting decision makers in situations characterized by time dynamics, uncertainty, and multiple objectives

A Decision Rule for Uncertain Multi-Criteria Pure Decision Making and Independent Criteria

The paper is concerned with multi-criteria decision-making under uncertainty with scenario planning. This topic has been explored by many researchers since almost all real-world decision problems contain multiple conflicting criteria and a deterministic evaluation of criteria is often impossible. We propose a procedure for uncertain multi-objective optimization which can be applied when seeking a pure strategy. A pure strategy, as opposed to a mixed strategy, allows the decision-maker to select and perform only one accessible alternative. The new approach takes into account the decision-maker’s preference structure (importance of particular goals) and nature (pessimistic, moderate or optimistic attitude towards a given problem). It is designed for one-shot decisions made under uncertainty with unknown probabilities (frequencies), see decision-making under complete uncertainty or decision-making under strategic uncertainty. The novel approach can be used in the case of totally independent payoff matrices for particular targets.This research is financed by the National Science Center in Poland (project registration number: 2014/15/D/HS4/00771)[email protected] of Informatics and Electronic Economy, Poznań University of Economics and BusinessAghdaie M. H., Zolfani S. H., Zavadskas E. K., 2013, Market Segment Evaluation and Selection Based on Application of Fuzzy AHP and COPRAS-G Methods, “Journal of Business Economics and Management” vol. 14(1).Ben Amor S., Jabeur K., Martel J., 2007, Multiple Criteria Aggregation Procedure for Mixed Evaluations, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 181, iss. 3.Benzion U., Cohen Y., Shavit T., 2010, The Newsvendor Problem with Unknown Distribution, “Journal of the Operational Research Society” iss. 6(6), DOI 10.1057/ jors.2009.56Besbes O., Muharremoglu A., 2013, On Implications of Censoring Demand in the Newsvendor Problem, “Management Science”, vol. 59, iss. 6, DOI 10.2139/ssrn.1983270Bieniek M., 2016, Bicriteria Optimization in the Newsvendor Problem with Exponentially Distributed Demand, “Multiple Criteria Decision Making”, vol. 11.Caplan B., 2001, Probability, Common Sense, and Realism: A Reply to Hulsmann and Block, “The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics”, vol. 4, no. 2.Carnap R., 1950, Logical Foundations of Probability, University Press, Chicago.De Finetti B., 1975, Theory of Probability. A Critical Introductory Treatment, Wiley, London.Dominiak C., 2006, Multicriteria Decision aid under Uncertainty, “Multiple Criteria Decision-Making’ 05”.Dominiak C., 2009, Multi-Criteria Decision Aiding Procedure under Risk and Uncertainty, “Multiple Criteria Decision Making’ 08”.Dubois D., Prade H., 2001, Possibility Theory, Probability Theory and Multiple-Valued Logics: A Clarification, “Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence” vol. 32.Dubois D., Prade H., 2012, Gradualness, Uncertainty and Bipolarity: Making Sense of Fuzzy Sets, “Fuzzy Sets and Systems”, vol. 192.Durbach I. N., 2014, Outranking under Uncertainty Using Scenarios, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 232, iss. 1.Durbach I. N., Stewart T. J., 2012, Modeling Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 223, iss. 1.Eiselt H. A., Marianov V., 2014, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making under Uncertainty: A Visual Approach, “International Transactions in Operational Research”, vol. 21, iss. 4.Fishburn P.C., 1984, Foundations of Risk Measurement. I. Risk or Probable Loss, “Management Science”, vol. 30.Frechet M., 1938, The Diverse Definitions of Probability. »Lecture at the fourth International Congress for the Unity of Science« Erkenntnis.Gaspars H., 2007, Ressource Allocation under Uncertainty: Choice Models and Computational Procedures [Alokacja zasobu w warunkach niepewności: modele decyzyjne i procedury obliczeniowe]. „Operations Research and Decisions”, vol. 1 (in Polish).Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2014a, A Hybrid of the Hurwicz and Bayes Rules in Decision- Making under Uncertainty [Propozycja hybrydy reguł Hurwicza i Bayesa w podejmowaniu decyzji w warunkach niepewności]. T. Trzaskalik (Ed.) „Modelowanie Preferencji a Ryzyko 2014. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach”, 178, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach, Katowice (in Polish).Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2014b, On a Decision Rule for Mixed Strategy Searching under Uncertainty on the Basis of the Coefficient of Optimism, “Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences”, vol. 110.Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2014c, Modifications of the Hurwicz’s Decision Rules, “Central European Journal of Operations Research”, vol. 22, iss. 4.Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2014d, The Use of a Modification of the Hurwicz’s Decision Rule in Multicriteria Decision-Making under Complete Uncertainty, “Business, Management and Education”, vol. 12, iss. 2.Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2015a, Modifications of the Omega Ratio for Decision- Making under Uncertainty, “Croatian Operational Research Review”, vol. 6, no. 1.Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2015b, On a Decision Rule Supported by a Forecasting Stage Based on the Decision-Maker’s Coefficient of Optimism, “Central European Journal of Operations Research”, vol. 23, iss. 3, DOI 10.1007/s10100-014-0364-5Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2015c, A Decision Rule for Uncertain Multicriteria Mixed Decision-Making Based on the Coefficient of Optimism, “Multiple Criteria Decision Making ’15”, University of Economics in Katowice.Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2015d, On a Decision Rule for Searching an Optimal Pure Strategy in Uncertain Multi-Criteria Decision-Making [O regule decyzyjnej wspierającej wielokryterialne poszukiwanie optymalnej strategii czystej w warunkach niepewności], “Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach”, University of Economics in Katowice (in Polish).Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2016a, Newsvendor Problem under Complete Uncertainty – A Case of Innovative Products, “Central European Journal of Operations Research”, DOI 10.1007/s10100- 016-0458-3.Gaspars-Wieloch H., Michalska E., 2016b, On two Applications of the Omega Ratio: MaxΩmin and Omega(H+B), “Research Papers of Wrocław University of Economics” (Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu), no. 446, Metody i zastosowania badań operacyjnych. Wrocław, 21-36 DOI 10.15611/pn.2016.446.02Gaspars-Wieloch H., 2017, A Decision Rule Based on Goal Programming and One-Stage Models for Uncertain Multi-Criteria Mixed Decision-Making and Games against Nature, “Croatian Operational Research Review”, vol. 8, no. 1.Ginevičius R., Zubrecovas V., 2009, Selection of the Optimal Real Estate Investment Project Basing on Multiple Criteria Evaluation Using Stochastic Dimensions, “Journal of Business Economics and Management”, vol. 10, iss. 3.Goodwin P., Wright G., 2001, Enhancing Strategy Evaluation in Scenario Planning: A Role for Decision Analysis, “Journal of Management Studies”, vol. 38, iss. 1.Guney S., Newell B.R., 2015, Overcomming Ambiguity Aversion through Experience, “Journal of Behavioral Decision Making”, vol. 28, iss. 2.Guo P., 2011, One-Shot Decision Theory, “IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics”, Part A, vol. 41, iss. 5.Guo P., Ma X. 2014 Newsvendor Models for Innovative Products with One-Shot Decision Theory, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 239, DOI 10.1016/j.ejor.2014.05.028Hau R., Pleskac T.J., Hertwig R., 2009, Decisions from Experience and Statistical Probabilities: Why they Trigger Different Choices than a priori Probabilities?, “Journal of Behavioral Decision Making”, DOI 10.1002/bdm.665Hopfe C. J., Augenbroe G.L.M., Hensen J.L.M., 2013, Multicriteria Decision-Making under Uncertainty in Building Performance Assessment, “Building and Environment”, vol. 69.Hurwicz L., 1952, A Criterion for Decision-Making under Uncertainty, “Technical Report”, 355, Cowles Commission.Janjic A., Andjelkovic A., Docic M., 2013, Multiple Criteria Decision-Making under Uncertainty Based on Stochastic Dominance, “Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Applied Mathematics and Computational Methods in Engineering” 16-19 July 2013, Rhodes Island, Greece.Kahneman D., 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus & Giroux.Kaplan S., Barish N.N., 1967, Decision-Making Allowing for Uncertainty of Future Investment Opportunities, “Management Science”, vol. 13, iss. 10.Knight F.H., 1921, Risk, Uncertainty, Profit, Hart. Boston MA, Schaffner & Marx, Houghton Mifflin Co.Kolmogorov A. N., 1933, Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung, Julius Springer, Berlin.Korhonen A., 2001, Strategic Financial Management in a Multinational Financial Conglomerate: A Multiple Goal Stochastic Programming Approach, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 128.Lee Y.-H., 2012, A Fuzzy Analytic Network Process Approach to Determining Prospective Competitive Strategy in China: A Case Study for Multinational Biotech Pharmaceutical Enterprises, “Journal of Business Economics and Management”, vol. 13, iss. 1.Liu Y., Fan Z., Hang Y., 2011, A Method for Stochastic Multiple Criteria Decision- Making Based on Dominance Degrees, “Information Sciences”, vol. 181, iss. 19.Liu B., 2007, Uncertainty Theory, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Liu B., 2009, Some Research Problems in Uncertainty Theory, “Journal of Uncertain Systems”, vol. 3, no. 1.Lo M.C., Michnik J., 2010, An Evaluation Method Based on Multi-Attributes Analysis with Stochastic Dominances for Improving the Information Quality, “International Journal of Information Systems for Logistics and Management”, vol. 6.Michnik J., 2013, Scenario Planning+MCDA Procedure for Innovation Selection Problem, “Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences”, 38(3).Mikhaidov L., Tsvetinov P. 2004 Evaluation of Services Using a Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process, “Applied Soft Computing”, vol. 5, iss. 1.Millett S.M., 2009, Should Probabilities Be Used with Scenarios?, “Journal of Futures Studies”, 13(4).Montibeller G., Gummer H., Tumidei D. 2006 Combining Scenario Planning and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Practice, “Journal of multi-criteria decision analysis” vol. 14.Ogryczak W., Śliwiński T., 2009, On Efficient WOWA Optimization for Decision Support under Risk, “International Journal of Approximate Reasoning”, vol. 50.Operations Research [Badania Operacyjne], 2008, W. Sikora (ed), Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warsaw (in Polish).Perez D.E, Hernandez J.G., Garcia M.J., Hernandez G.J., 2015, Hurwicz Method Modified and the Amplitude Model (TAM), In Delener et al. (Ed), GBATA 2015 Reading book, GBATA, USA.Piasecki K., 2016, Intuicyjne zbiory rozmyte jako narzędzie finansów behawioralnych [Intuitive Fuzzy Sets as a Tool of Behavioral Finances], edu-Libri (in Polish).Piegat A., 2010, Uncertainty of Probability, Workshop on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Generalized Nets.Popper K., 1959, The Propensity Interpretation of Probability, “The British Journal of the Philosophy of Science”, 10(37).Ram C., Montibeller G., Morton A., 2010, Extending the Use of Scenario Planning and MCDA for the Evaluation of Strategic Options, “Journal of Operational Research Society”, vol. 62, iss. 5.Ramík J., Hanclova J., Trzaskalik T., Sitarz S., 2008, Fuzzy Multiobjective Methods in Multistage Decision Problems, “Multiple Criteria Decision-Making ‘07”.Ramsey F., 1931, Truth and Probability, In The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, by Frank Ramsey, Routledge, Kegan Paul, London.Ravindran A. R., 2008, Operations Research and Management Science Handbook, Boca Raton, London, New York, CRS Press.Shafer G., 1976, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Sentz K., Ferson S., 2002, Combination of Evidence in Dempster-Shafer Theory, Sandia Report SAND2002-0835, April 2002, Albuquerque, NM.Silva R.C., 2016, A Multiobjective Approach to Solve Container Ship Loading Planning Problem with Uncertainty, Conference Handbook, 28th European Conference on Operational Research, EURO, The Association of European Operational Research Societies.Stewart T. J., 2005, Dealing with Uncertainties in MCDA, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State-of-the-Art Surveys, “International Series in Operations Research & Management Science”, 78.Stirling W.C., 2003, Satisficing Games and Decision-Making. With Applications to Engineering and Computer Science, Cambridge University Press.Suo M.Q., Li Y.P., Huang G.H., 2012, Multicriteria Decision-Making under Uncertainty: An Advanced Ordered Weighted Averaging Operator for Planning Electric Power Systems, “Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence”, vol. 25, iss. 1.Troutt M.D., Pettypool M.D., 1989, On the Role of Mixed Strategies in the Elementary Decision Analysis and Related Decision-Support-System Treatments, “Journal of Operational Research Society”, vol. 40, iss. 6.Trzaskalik T., 2008, Introduction to Operations Research with Computer [Wprowadzenie do badań operacyjnych z komputerem], 2nd ed. Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warsaw (in Polish).Trzaskalik T., 2014, Multicriteria Decision Aiding [Wielokryterialne wspomaganie decyzji], Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne, Warsaw (in Polish).Tsaur S., Chang T., Yen C., 2002, The Evaluation of Airline Service Quality by Fuzzy MCDM, “Tourism Management”, vol. 23, iss. 2.Urli B., Nadeau R. 2004 PROMISE/scenarios: An Interactive Method for Multiobjective Stochastic Linear Programming under Partial Uncertainty, “European Journal of Operational Research”, vol. 155, iss. 2.Van Lambalgen M. 1996 Randomness and Foundations of Probability: von Mises' Axiomatization of Random Sequences. Probability, Statistics and Game Theory, Papers in honor of David Blackwell, Institute for Mathematical Statistics.Von Mises L., 1949, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, Yale University Press.Von Mises R, 1957, Probability, Statistics and Truth, The Macmillan Company, New York.von Neumann J., Morgenstern O., 1944, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New York.Wachowicz T., 2015, Methods of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis in Quantitative Scientific Research [Metody wielokryterialnej analizy decyzyjnej w ilościowych badaniach naukowych], [in:] Podstawy metodologii badań w naukach o zarządzaniu, W. Czakon (ed.), Oficyna Wolters Kluwer business (in Polish)Walley P., 1991, Statistical Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities, Chapman and Hall.Waters D., 2011, Supply Chain Risk Management. Vulnerability and Resilience in Logistics. Kogan Page.Weber M., 1987, Decision-Making with Incomplete Information, “European Journal of Operational Research” vol. 28.Wojewnik P., Szapiro T., 2010, Bireference Procedure FBI for Interactive Multicriteria Optimization with Fuzzy Coefficients, “Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics”, vol. 2.Xu R., 2000, Fuzzy Least-Squares Priority Method in the Analytic Hierarchy Process, “Fuzzy Sets and Systems”, vol. 112, iss. 3.Yu C., 2002, A GP-AHP Method for Solving Group Decision-Making Fuzzy AHP Problems, “Computers and Operations Research”, vol. 29, iss. 14.Zadeh L., 1978, Fuzzy Sets as the Basis for a Theory of Possibility, “Fuzzy Sets and Systems” 1.Zio E., Pedroni N., 2013, Methods for Representing Uncertainty. A Literature Review. Apports de la recherche 2013-3, Risk Analysis. Les cahiers de la securite industrielle, FONCSI.3(87)779