Implementing and testing a complex interactive MOLP algorithm

Many business decisions can be modeled as multiobjective linear programming (MOLP) problems. MOLP algorithms seek solutions to these problems by interacting with decision makers to arrive at an acceptable solution. However, due in part to the increasing complexity of these algorithms, and in part to the failure of developers to use graphical user interfaces, testing and comparison of competing algorithms has been minimal. We present herein results of research designed to address this circumstance. Using widely available microcomputer tools, we designed and built a Decision Support System (DSS) capable of running MOLP algorithms, and conducted a field test which asked 98 decision makers to solve a business case using the system. Two algorithms were programmed into the DSS, one a new and more mathematically complex algorithm, and one a previously used benchmark. Results demonstrate that the more complex algorithm was preferred as a decision-making aid over the benchmark. Additionally, results show that users found the DSS equally easy to work with for both algorithms, suggesting that the graphical user interface sufficiently masked the complexity of the new algorithm. This result is encouraging for the possibility of the implementation and testing of increasingly sophisticated MOLP algorithms.

[1]  G. W. Evans,et al.  An Overview of Techniques for Solving Multiobjective Mathematical Programs , 1984 .

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

[3]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[4]  Pekka J. Korhonen,et al.  Multiple criteria decision support: The state of research and future directions , 1992, Comput. Oper. Res..

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

[6]  H. Simon,et al.  Models of Man. , 1957 .

[7]  Charles E. Downing,et al.  Multiobjective linear programming with context-dependent preferences , 1997 .

[8]  J. Ringuest Multiobjective Optimization: Behavioral and Computational Considerations , 1992 .

[9]  Tawfik Jelassi,et al.  DSS research and practice in perspective , 1994, Decis. Support Syst..

[10]  Efraim Turban,et al.  Decision support systems and intelligent systems , 1997 .

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

[12]  Pekka Korhonen,et al.  Multiple criteria decision support - A review , 1992 .

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

[14]  John Buchanan,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation of Interactive MCDM Methods and the Decision Making Process , 1994 .

[15]  Blake Ives,et al.  The measurement of user information satisfaction , 1983, CACM.

[16]  R. Benayoun,et al.  Linear programming with multiple objective functions: Step method (stem) , 1971, Math. Program..

[17]  Roy J. Clinton,et al.  Interactive Optimization Aspects of Electronic Spreadsheet Models for Design and Planning , 1991 .

[18]  William J. Doll,et al.  The Measurement of End-User Computing Satisfaction , 1988, MIS Q..

[19]  Y. Aksoy Interactive Multiple Objective Decision Making: A Bibliography (1965–1988) , 1990 .

[20]  Christopher P. Puto,et al.  Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity & the Similarity Hypothesis. , 1981 .

[21]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion , 1992 .

[22]  C. Hwang,et al.  Fuzzy Multiple Objective Decision Making: Methods And Applications , 1996 .

[23]  Sammy W. Pearson,et al.  Development of a Tool for Measuring and Analyzing Computer User Satisfaction , 1983 .