Learning-Based Preference Modeling in Engineering Design Decision-Making

Focusing on the efforts towards a consistent preference representation in decision based engineering design, this paper presents a learning-based comparison and preference modeling process. Through effective integration of a deductive reasoning-based on designer's outcome ranking in a lottery questions-based elicitation process, this work offers a reliable framework for formulating utility functions that reflect designer's priorities accurately and consistently. It is expected that this integrated approach will reduce designer's cognitive burden, and lead to accurate and consistent preference representation. Salient features of this approach include a linear programming based dynamic preference learning method and a logical analysis of preference inconsistencies. The development of this method and its utilization in engineering design are presented in the context of a mechanism design problem and the results are discussed.

[1]  Daniel Solow.  Linear Programming: An Introduction to Finite Improvement Algorithms , 1984 .

[2]  Joanna R. Baker,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making with Inexact Value-Function Assessment , 1990 .

[3]  M. A. Speller,et al.  An Introduction to Linear Programming. , 1988 .

[4]  Oleg I. Larichev,et al.  ZAPROS-LM — A method and system for ordering multiattribute alternatives , 1995 .

[5]  David L. Olson,et al.  Consistency and Accuracy in Decision Aids: Experiments with Four Multiattribute Systems* , 1995 .

[6]  J. Siskos.  Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making , 1982 .

[7]  W. Edwards,et al.  Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research , 1986 .

[8]  Andrzej Osyczka,et al.  7 – Multicriteria optimization for engineering design , 1985 .

[9]  R. Dawes,et al.  Linear models in decision making. , 1974 .

[10]  Gregory W. Fischer,et al.  UTILITY MODELS FOR MULTIPLE OBJECTIVE DECISIONS: DO THEY ACCURATELY REPRESENT HUMAN PREFERENCES?* , 1979 .

[11]  T. Saaty.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[12]  Chelsea C. White,et al.  Multiobjective intelligent computer-aided design , 1991, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[13]  V. Belton.  A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function , 1986 .

[14]  Ralph E. Steuer,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: The Next Ten Years , 1992 .

[15]  O. Larichev,et al.  Experiments comparing qualitative approaches to rank ordering of multiattribute alternatives , 1993 .

[16]  Yacov Y. Haimes,et al.  Multiobjective Decision Making: Theory and Methodology , 1983 .

[17]  O. Svenson,et al.  Decision making : cognitive models and explanations , 1997 .

[18]  Pratyush Sen,et al.  Preference modelling by estimating local utility functions for multiobjective optimization , 1996 .

[19]  R. L. Winkler.  Decision modeling and rational choice: AHP and utility theory , 1990 .

[20]  P. Fishburn.  Methods of Estimating Additive Utilities , 1967 .

[21]  Deborah L Thurston,et al.  A formal method for subjective design evaluation with multiple attributes , 1991 .

[22]  R. Słowiński,et al.  Molp with an interactive assessment of a piecewise linear utility function , 1987 .

[23]  Wan Seon Shin,et al.  Interactive multiple objective optimization: Survey I - continuous case , 1991, Comput. Oper. Res..