Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiattribute Utility Theory: Recent Accomplishments and What Lies Ahead

References

• Aouni B., Ben Abdelaziz F., El-Fayedh R. Chance constrained compromise programming for portfolio selection. (2006) . Working paper, Laboratoire LARODEC, Institut Superieur de Gestion, Tunis, TunisiaGoogle Scholar
• Bana e Costa C. A., Soares J. O. Multicriteria approaches for portfolio selection: An overview. Rev. Financial Markets (2001) 4:19–26Google Scholar
• Belton V., Goicoechea A., Duckstein L., Zionts S. Integrating data envelopment analysis with multiple criteria decision analysis. Proc. IXth Internat. Conf. Multiple Criteria Decision Making (1992) (Springer, Berlin) 71–79Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benson H. P., Sun E. Outcome space partition of the weight set in multiobjective linear programming. J. Optim. Theory Appl. (2000) 105:17–36Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bordley R., Kirkwood C. W. Multiattribute preference analysis with performance targets. Oper. Res. (2004) 52:823–835Link, Google Scholar
• Branke J., Kaussler T., Schmeck H. Guidance in evolutionary multi-objective optimization. Adv. Engrg. Software (2001) 32:499–507Crossref, Google Scholar
• Butler J. C., Dyer J. S., Jia J. Using attributes to predict objectives in preference models. Decision Anal. (2006) 3:100–116Link, Google Scholar
• Butler J. C., Chebeskov A. N., Dyer J. S., Edmunds T. A., Jia J., Oussanov V. I. The United States and Russia evaluate plutonium disposition options with multiattribute utility theory. Interfaces (2005) 35:88–101Link, Google Scholar
• Caballero R., Gómez T., Ruiz F. Goal programming: Realistic targets for the near future. (2007) . Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Malaga, Malaga, SpainGoogle Scholar
• Caballero R., Cerdá E., Muñoz M. M., Rey L., Stancu-Minasian I. M. Efficient solution concepts and their relations in stochastic multiobjective programming. J. Optim. Theory Appl. (2001) 110:53–74Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlson K. A., Bond S. D. Improving preference assessment: Limiting the effect of context through pre-exposure to attribute levels. Management Sci. (2006) 52:410–421Link, Google Scholar
• Carlson K., Pearo L. Limiting predecisional distortion by prior valuation of attribute components. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes (2004) 94:48–59Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charnes A., Cooper W. W.Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming (1961) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Charnes A., Cooper W. W., Rhodes E. Measuring efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (1978) 2:429–444Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen-Ritzo C., Harrison T., Kwasnica A., Thomas D. Better, faster, cheaper: An experimental analysis of a multiattribute reverse auction mechanism with restricted information feedback. Management Sci. (2005) 51:1753–1762Link, Google Scholar
• Coello C. A. C., Lamont G. B.Applications of Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms (2004) (World Scientific, Singapore) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Corne D., Knowles J., Oates M. The Pareto envelope-based selection algorithm for multiobjective optimization. Proc. Sixth Internat. Conf. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (2000) (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany) 839–848Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deb K.Multi-Objective Optimization Using Evolutionary Algorithms (2001) (Wiley, Chichester, UK) Google Scholar
• Deb K. Unveiling innovative design principles by means of multiple conflicting objectives. Engrg. Optim. (2003) 35:445–470Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deb K., Gupta H. Introducing robustness in multi-objective optimization. Evolutionary Comput. (2006) 14:463–494Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deb K., Sundar J. Reference point based multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Proc. Eighth Annual Conf. Genetic and Evolutionary Comput. (2006) (ACM, New York) 635–642Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delquié P. Inconsistent trade-offs between attributes: New evidence in preference assessment biases. Management Sci. (1993) 39:1382–1395Link, Google Scholar
• Delquié P. Bi-matching: A new preference assessment method to reduce compatibility effects. Management Sci. (1997) 43:640–658Link, Google Scholar
• Doumpos M., Zopounidis C.Multicriteria Decision Aid Classification Methods (2002) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) Google Scholar
• Doyle R. H., Green J. R. DEA and MCDM. Omega (1993) 6:713–715Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dyer J. S., Fishburn P. C., Steuer R. E., Wallenius J., Zionts S. Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: The next ten years. Management Sci. (1992) 38:645–654Link, Google Scholar
• Edwards W., Miles R., von Winterfeldt D.Advances in Decision Analysis (2007) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ehrgott M.Multicriteria Optimization (2005) (Springer-Verlag, Berlin) Google Scholar
• Ehrgott M., Gandibleux X. An annotated bibliography of multiobjective combinatorial optimization. OR Spektrum (2000) 22:425–460Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ehtamo H., Hämäläinen R. P. Interactive multiple-criteria methods for reaching Pareto optimal agreements in negotiations. Group Decision Negotiation (2001) 10:475–491Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ehtamo H., Hämäläinen R. P., Heiskanen P., Teich J., Verkama M., Zionts S. Generating Pareto solutions in two-party negotiations by adjusting artificial constraints. Management Sci. (1999) 45:1697–1709Link, Google Scholar
• Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M.Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys (2005) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisher R.International Mediation: A Working Guide (1978) (International Peace Academy, New York) Google Scholar
• Fonseca C. M., Fleming P. J. Genetic algorithms for multiobjective optimization: Formulation, discussion, and generalization. Proc. Fifth Internat. Conf. Genetic Algorithms (1993) (Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA) 416–23Google Scholar
• Fonseca C., Fleming P. J., Zitzler E., Deb K., Thiele L.Proc. Second EMO-03 Conf., Lecture Notes in Computer Science (2003) 2632(Springer, Berlin) Google Scholar
• Fortune Staying smart. (1999) May 10). http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1999/05/10/259560/index.htmGoogle Scholar
• Gardiner L. R., Steuer R. E. Unified interactive multiple objective programming. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (1994) 74:391–406Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garfield E. Charting the growth of science. (2007) . Presented at the Chemical Heritage Foundation (May 17)Google Scholar
• Geoffrion A., Krishnan R. Prospects for operations research in the e-business era. Interfaces (2001) 30:6–36Link, Google Scholar
• Greco S., Matarazzo B., Slowinski R., Gal T., Stewart T., Hanne T. The use of rough sets and fuzzy sets in MCDM. Advances in Multiple Criteria Decision Making (1999) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) 14.1–14.59Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greco S., Matarazzo B., Slowinski R., Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. Decision rule approach. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys (2005) (Springer, New York) 507–608Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hallerbach W. G., Spronk J. The relevance of MCDM for financial decisions. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (2002) 11:187–195Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halme M., Joro T., Korhonen P., Salo S., Wallenius J. A value efficiency approach to incorporating preference information in data envelopment analysis. Management Sci. (1999) 45:103–115Link, Google Scholar
• Hämäläinen R. P. Reversing the perspective on applications of decision analysis. Decision Anal. (2004) 1:26–31Link, Google Scholar
• Hämäläinen R. P., Alaja S. The threat of biases in environmental decision analysis. (2003) . Research reports, E12, Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki, Finland, http://www.e-reports.sal.hut.fiGoogle Scholar
• Hammond J. S., Keeney R. L., Raiffa H. Even swaps: A rational method for making trade-offs. Harvard Bus. Rev. (1998) 76:137–149Google Scholar
• Hobbs B. F., Meier P.Energy Decisions and the Environment: A Guide to the Use of Multicriteria Methods (2000) (Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogarth R., Karelaia N. Simple models for multiattribute choice with many alternatives: When it does and does not pay to face trade-offs with binary attributes. Management Sci. (2005) 51:1860–1872Link, Google Scholar
• Horn J., Nafploitis N., Goldberg D. A niched Pareto genetic algorithm for multiobjective optimization. Proc. First IEEE Conf. Evolutionary Comput. (1994) (IEEE Service Center, Piscataway, NJ) 82–87Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ignizio J., Romero C., Bidgoli H. Goal programming. Encyclopedia of Information Systems (2003) 2(Academic Press, San Diego) 489–500Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jaszkiewicz A. Multiple objective metaheuristic algorithms for combinatorial optimization. (2001) . Habilitation thesis, 360, Poznan University of Technology, Poznan, PolandGoogle Scholar
• Joro T., Korhonen P., Wallenius J. Structural comparison of data envelopment analysis and multiple objective linear programming. Management Sci. (1998) 44:962–970Link, Google Scholar
• Kasanen E., Wallenius H., Wallenius J., Zionts S. A study of high-level managerial decision processes, with implications for MCDM research. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2000) 120:496–510Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keefer D., Kirkwood C. W., Corner J. Perspective on decision analysis applications. Decision Anal. (2004) 1:4–22Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney R.Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making (1992) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Keeney R. Common mistakes in making value trade-offs. Oper. Res. (2002) 50:935–945Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney R., Raiffa H.Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (1976) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Keeney R. L., See K. E., von Winterfeldt D. Evaluating academic programs: With applications to U.S. graduate decision science programs. Oper. Res. (2006) 54:813–828Link, Google Scholar
• Kirkwood C. W.Strategic Decision Making: Multiobjective Decision Analysis with Spreadsheets (1997) (Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA) Google Scholar
• Köksalan M., Phelps S. An evolutionary metaheuristic for approximating preference-nondominated solutions. INFORMS J. Comput. (2007) 19:291–301Link, Google Scholar
• Köksalan M., Plante R. D. Interactive multi-criteria optimization for multiple response product and process design. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management (2003) 5:334–347Link, Google Scholar
• Korhonen P., Karaivanova J. An algorithm for projecting a reference direction onto the nondominated set of given points. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybern. A (1999) 29:429–435Crossref, Google Scholar
• Korhonen P., Syrjänen M. Resource allocation based on efficiency analysis. Management Sci. (2004) 50:1134–1144Link, Google Scholar
• Korhonen P., Wallenius J. Letter to the editor: Behavioral issues in MCDM: Neglected research questions. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (1996) 5:178–182Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kouvelis P., Sayin S. Algorithm robust for the bicriteria discrete optimization problem: Heuristic variations and computational evidence. Ann. Oper. Res. (2006) 147:71–85Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liesiö J., Mild P., Salo A. Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2007) 181:1488–1505Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lotfi V., Stewart T., Zionts S. An aspiration-level interactive model for multiple criteria decision making. Comput. Oper. Res. (1992) 19:671–681Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lotov A., Bushenkov V. A., Kamenev G. K.Interactive Decision Maps: Approximation and Visualization of Pareto Frontier (2004) (Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maes P., Guttman R., Moukas A. Agents that buy and sell. Comm. ACM (1999) 42:81–91Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malczewski J.GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis (1999) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Matheson D., Matheson J. E., Edwards W., Miles R., von Winterfeldt D. From decision analysis to the decision organization. Advances in Decision Analysis (2007) (Cambridge University Press, New York) 419–450Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miettinen K.Nonlinear Multiobjective Optimization (1999) (Kluwer Academic, Boston) Google Scholar
• Miettinen K., Mäkelä M. M. Interactive bundle-based method for nondifferentiable multiobjective optimization: NIMBUS. Optimization (1995) 34:231–246Crossref, Google Scholar
• Montibeller G., Belton V., Ackermann F., Ensslin L. Reasoning maps for decision aid: An integrated approach for problem-structuring and multi-criteria evaluation. J. Oper. Res. Society (2008) 59:575–589Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadkarni S., Shenoy P. A Bayesian network approach to making inferences in causal maps. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2001) 128:479–498Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadkarni S., Shenoy P. A causal mapping approach to constructing Bayesian networks. Decision Support Systems (2004) 38:259–281Crossref, Google Scholar
• Olson D.Decision Aids for Selection Problems (1996) (Springer-Verlag)Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pawlak Z. Rough sets. Internat. J. Comput. Inform. Sci. (1982) 11:341–356Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phelps S., Köksalan M. An interactive evolutionary metaheuristic for multiobjective combinatorial optimization. Management Sci. (2003) 49:1726–1738Link, Google Scholar
• Pöyhönen M., Hämäläinen R. P. On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2001) 129:569–585Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ragsdale C. T.Spreadsheet Modeling and Decision Analysis: A Practical Introduction to Management Science (2004) (South-Western College, Boston) Google Scholar
• Raiffa H.The Art and Science of Negotiation (1982) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Roy B. A missing link in operational research decision aiding: Robustness analysis. Foundations Comput. Decision Sci. (1998) 23:141–160Google Scholar
• Saaty T. L.Decision Making for Leaders (1999) (RWS Publications, Pittsburgh) Google Scholar
• Salo A., Hämäläinen R. P. Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. Oper. Res. (1992) 40:1053–1061Link, Google Scholar
• Sayin S. A procedure to find discrete representations of the efficient set with specified convergence errors. Oper. Res. (2003) 51:427–436Link, Google Scholar
• Schaffer J. D. Some experiments in machine learning using vector evaluated genetic algorithms. (1984) . Ph.D. thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TNGoogle Scholar
• Scheubrein R., Zionts S. A problem structuring front end for a multiple criteria decision support system. Comput. Oper. Res. (2006) 33:18–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sebenius J. K., Edwards W., Miles R. F., von Winterfeldt D. Negotiation analysis: Between decisions and games. Advances in Decision Analysis (2007) (Cambridge University Press, New York) 469–488Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sim K. M., Choi C. Y. Agents that react to changing market conditions. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybernetics B (2003) 33:188–201Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H. A behavioral model of rational choice. Quart. J. Econom. (1955) 69:99–118Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slowinski R.Intelligent Decision Support: Handbook of Applications and Advances of the Rough Sets Theory (1992) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slowinski R., Greco S., Matarazzo B. Axiomatization of utility, outranking and decision-rule preference models for multiple-criteria classification problems under partial inconsistency with the dominance principle. Control Cybernetics (2002) 31:1005–1035Google Scholar
• Srinivas N., Deb K. Multiobjective optimization using nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms. Evolutionary Comput. J. (1994) 2:221–248Crossref, Google Scholar
• Statnikov R. B., Matusov J. B.Multicriteria Analysis in Engineering (2002) (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steuer R. E. ADBASE: A multiple objective linear programming solver for all efficient extreme points and unbounded efficient edges. (2006) . Technical report, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
• Steuer R. E., Qi Y., Hirschberger M. Multiple objectives in portfolio selection. J. Financial Decision Making (2005) 1:5–20Google Scholar
• Sun M. Procedures for finding nondominated solutions for multiple objective network programming problems. Transportation Sci. (2003) 37:139–152Link, Google Scholar
• Tan K. C., Khor E. F., Lee T. H.Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications (2005) (Springer, Berlin) Google Scholar
• Teich J., Wallenius H., Wallenius J. Advances in negotiation science. Trans. Oper. Res. (1994) 6:55–94Google Scholar
• Teich J., Wallenius H., Wallenius J., Koppius O. Emerging multiple issue e-auctions. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2004) 159:1–16Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsetlin I., Winkler R. Decision making with multiattribute performance targets: The impacts of changes in performance and target distributions. Oper. Res. (2007) 55:226–233Link, Google Scholar
• Ulungu E., Teghem J. Multiobjective combinatorial optimization problems: A survey. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (1994) 3:83–104Crossref, Google Scholar
• Von Winterfeldt D., Schweitzer E. An assessment of tritium supply alternatives in support of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. Interfaces (1998) 22:92–118Link, Google Scholar
• Wang J. G., Zionts S. WebAIM: An online aspiration level interactive method. J. Multi-Criteria Decision Anal. (2005) 13:51–63Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang J. G., Zionts S. The aspiration level interactive method (AIM) reconsidered: Robustness of solutions to multiple criteria problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2006) 17(2):948–958Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang J. G., Zionts S. Negotiating wisely: Considerations based on MCDM/MAUT. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (2008) 188:191–205Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wiecek M. M., Zhang H. A parallel algorithm for multiple objective linear programs. Comput. Optim. Appl. (1997) 8:41–56Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang J. B., Li D. Normal vector identification and interactive tradeoff analysis using minimax formulation in multiobjective optimization. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, Cybernetics A (2002) 32:305–319Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zitzler E., Deb K., Thiele L., Coello C. A. C., Corne D.Proc. First Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization Conf., Lecture Notes in Computer Science (2001) 1993(Springer, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar