The most efficient unit without explicit inputs: An extended MILP-DEA model

Abstract Data envelopment analysis (DEA) has been a very popular method for measuring and benchmarking relative efficiency of each decision making units (DMUs) with multiple inputs and multiple outputs. DEA and Discriminant Analysis (DA) are similar in classifying units to exhibit either good or poor performance. On the other hand, selecting the most efficient unit between several efficient ones is one of the main issues in multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). Some proponents have suggested some approaches and claimed their methodologies involve discriminating power to determine the most efficient DMU without explicit input. This paper focuses on the weakness of a recent methodology of these approaches and to avoid this drawback presents a mixed integer programming (MIP) approach. To illustrate this drawback and compare discriminating power of the recent methodology to our new approach, a real data set containing 40 professional tennis players is utilized.

[1]  Gholam R. Amin Comments on finding the most efficient DMUs in DEA: An improved integrated model , 2009, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[2]  Nuria Ramón,et al.  Common sets of weights as summaries of DEA profiles of weights: With an application to the ranking of professional tennis players , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[3]  R. Dyson,et al.  Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1988 .

[4]  B. Golany,et al.  Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA , 1993 .

[5]  T. Sexton,et al.  Data Envelopment Analysis: Critique and Extensions , 1986 .

[6]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 1978 .

[7]  William W. Cooper,et al.  Introduction to Data Envelopment Analysis and Its Uses: With Dea-Solver Software and References , 2005 .

[8]  Gary R. Reeves,et al.  A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  P. Andersen,et al.  A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis , 1993 .

[10]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming , 1990 .

[11]  Da Ruan,et al.  Integrating data envelopment analysis and analytic hierarchy for the facility layout design in manufacturing systems , 2006, Inf. Sci..

[12]  E. Ertugrul Karsak,et al.  Improved common weight MCDM model for technology selection , 2008 .

[13]  Mehdi Toloo,et al.  Finding the most efficient DMUs in DEA: An improved integrated model , 2007, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[14]  Mehdi Toloo,et al.  On Ranking Discovered Rules of Data Mining by Data Envelopment Analysis: Some Models with Wider Applications , 2011 .

[15]  E. E. Karsak *,et al.  Practical common weight multi-criteria decision-making approach with an improved discriminating power for technology selection , 2005 .

[16]  Barton A. Smith,et al.  Comparative Site Evaluations for Locating a High-Energy Physics Lab in Texas , 1986 .

[17]  Mehdi Toloo,et al.  A new method for ranking discovered rules from data mining by DEA , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[18]  Mehdi Toloo,et al.  A NEW INTEGRATED DEA MODEL FOR FINDING MOST BCC-EFFICIENT DMU , 2009 .

[19]  Mehdi Toloo,et al.  An improved MCDM DEA model for technology selection , 2006 .