The LBS-Discrete Interactive Procedure for Multiple-Criteria Analysis of Decision Problems

An interactive procedure, called LBS-Discrete (Light Beam Search), for multiple-criteria analysis of decision problems with an explicitly given set of alternatives is presented. An alternative is defined as a non-dominated point in the space of criteria. The set of alternatives is assumed to be finite and relatively large. The procedure is an extension of the Light Beam Search method for linear and non-linear multiple-objective programming (Jaszkiewicz and Slowinski, 1992b) to the discrete case. While existing interactive procedures may involve the decision maker (DM) in too difficult comparisons of the candidates for the best compromise alternative, the LBS-Discrete procedure tries to overcome this inconvenience. It supports both learning about the problem and successive improvement of the current point. At the decision phase of the procedure, a sample of non-dominated points, composed of the current point and a number of alternative proposals, is presented to the DM. In order to ensure a relatively easy evaluation of the sample by the DM, it is generated in a way taking into account a preference information of intra- and inter-criteria type given by the DM with respect to the current point. The local preference model has the form of an outranking relation and defines a subregion of the non-dominated set. The sample presented to the DM comes from this subregion. The procedure can be compared to projecting a focused beam of light from a spotlight at the reference point onto the non-dominated set; the highlighted subregion changes when either the reference point or the point of interest in the non-dominated set are changed. This explains the name LBS-Discrete. Finally, a microcomputer implementation of the LBS-Discrete with an important graphical interface is characterized and its application to an agricultural problem is presented.

[1]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  A DSS for Ressource—Constrained Project Scheduling under Uncertainty , 1993 .

[2]  P. Vincke Basic Concepts of Preference Modelling , 1990 .

[3]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Applications of the analytic hierarchy process to long range planning processes , 1982 .

[4]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[5]  B. Roy Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision , 1985 .

[6]  Andrzej Jaszkiewicz,et al.  The Light Beam Search Over a Non-dominated Surface of a Multiple-objective Programming Problem , 1994 .

[7]  R. S. Laundy,et al.  Multiple Criteria Optimisation: Theory, Computation and Application , 1989 .

[8]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Advances in project scheduling , 1989 .

[9]  B. Roy THE OUTRANKING APPROACH AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF ELECTRE METHODS , 1991 .

[10]  Roman Slowinski,et al.  Multiobjective project scheduling under multiple-category resource constraint , 1989 .

[11]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[12]  Bernard Roy,et al.  Aide multicritère à la décision : méthodes et cas , 1993 .

[13]  A. D. Nikiforov,et al.  Multicriterion linear programming problems: (Analytical survey) , 1987 .

[14]  Bernard Roy,et al.  Multicriteria programming of water supply systems for rural areas , 1992 .

[15]  Bernard Roy,et al.  A programming method for determining which Paris metro stations should be renovated , 1986 .

[16]  Fatemeh Zahedi,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process—A Survey of the Method and its Applications , 1986 .

[17]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[18]  A. Jaszkiewicz,et al.  Cone contraction method with visual interaction for multiple-objective non-linear programmes , 1992 .

[19]  A. Wierzbicki On the completeness and constructiveness of parametric characterizations to vector optimization problems , 1986 .

[20]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  An aspiration-level interactive model for multiple criteria decision making , 1992, Comput. Oper. Res..