Metrika

  • citati u SCIndeksu: [9]
  • citati u CrossRef-u:[6]
  • citati u Google Scholaru:[]
  • posete u poslednjih 30 dana:18
  • preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:16

Sadržaj

članak: 1 od 1  
2012, vol. 60, br. 2, str. 48-70
Subjektivni pristup određivanju težina kriterijuma
Univerzitet odbrane, Vojna akademija, Beograd

e-adresamilic.milicevic@mod.gov.rs
Ključne reči: težine kriterijuma; kompenzacione metode; nekompenzacione metode; metode prioritizacije; rangiranje kriterijuma; grupna težina kriterijuma
Sažetak
U radu je prikazan metod subjektivnog pristupa određivanju težina kriterijuma. Ukratko su prikazane kompenzacione i nekompenzacione metode određivanja težina kriterijuma. Detaljnije je razrađeno određivanje težina kriterijuma primenom parnih poređenja i rangiranja. U poslednjem delu rada ukratko su navedeni mogući načini određivanja težina kriterijuma u grupnom okruženju. Subjektivni pristup uključuje uticaj donosioca odluke na težine kriterijuma, a samim tim i na konačno rešenje višekriterijumskog problema. Za razliku od objektivnog pristupa neke metode subjektivnog pristupa ne zahtevaju postojanje matrice odlučivanja. Osnovni cilj rada je sistematizovan prikaz mogućih načina određivanja težina kriterijuma od strane donosioca odluke ili više učesnika u procesu odlučivanja.
Reference
Alfares, H.K., Duffuaa, S.O. (2009) Assigning cardinal weights in multi-criteria decision making based on ordinal ranking. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, (15): 125-133
Alfares, H.K. (2007) Combining criteria ranks for calculating their weights in group MCDM. Dhahran: King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals - Systems Engineering Department
Bana, C.C., Vansnick, J.C. (1994) MACBETH: An interactive path towards the construction of cardinal value functions. International Transactions in Operational Research, 1(4): 489-500
Bottomley, P.A., Doyle, J.R., Green, R.H. (2000) Testing the reliability of weight elicitation methods: Direct rating versus point allocation. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(4): 508-513
Doyle, J.R., Green, R.H., Bottomley, P.A. (1997) Judging Relative Importance: Direct Rating and Point Allocation Are Not Equivalent. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 70(1): 65-72
Edwards, W., Barron, F.H. (1994) SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60(3): 306
Grafakos, S., Zevgolis, D., Oikonomou, V. (2008) Incorporating stakeholders preferences for ex ante evaluation of energy and climate policy interactions: Development of a multi criteria analysis weighting methodology. u: EASY-ECO Vienna conference
Graham, A. (1987) Nonnegative matrices and applicable topics in linear algebra. Chichester, UK: Ellis Horwood
Green, P.E., Srinivasan, V. (1978) Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research, 5 103-123
Keeney, R., Raiffa, H. (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York, itd: Wiley
Lootsma, F.A., Bots, P.W.G. (1999) The assignment of scores for output-based research funding. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8(1): 44-50
Mikhailov, L. (2000) A fuzzy programming method for deriving priorities in the analytic hierarchy process. J Oper Res Soc, 51, 341-349
Milić, M.R., Župac, G.Ž. (2012) Objektivni pristup određivanju težina kriterijuma. Vojnotehnički glasnik, vol. 60, br. 1, str. 39-56
Poyhonen, M., Hamalainen, R. (2001) On the convergence of multiattribute weighting methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 129(3): 569-585
Roberts, R., Goodwin, P. (2002) Weight approximations in multi-attribute decision models. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 11(6): 291-303
Rogers, M., Bruen, M. (1998) A new system for weighting environmental criteria for use within ELECTRE III. European Journal of Operational Research, 107(3): 552-563
Solymosi, T., Dombi, J. (1986) A method for determining the weights of criteria: The centralized weights. European Journal of Operational Research, 26(1): 35-41
Srđević, B., Kolarov, V. (2005) Varijantna AHP vrednovanja dispozicija crpnih stanica na slivnom području. Vodoprivreda, vol. 37, br. 4-6, str. 203-214
Stillwell, W.G., Seaver, D.A., Edwards, W. (1981) A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28(1): 62-77
von Winterfeldt, D., Edwards, W. (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Weber, M., Borcherding, K. (1993) Behavioral influences on weight judgments in multiattribute decision making. European Journal of Operational Research, 67(1): 1-12
 

O članku

jezik rada: srpski
vrsta rada: naučna kritika
DOI: 10.5937/vojtehg1202048M
objavljen u SCIndeksu: 24.07.2012.
metod recenzije: dvostruko anoniman

Povezani članci

Vojnotehnički glasnik (2014)
Određivanje težina kriterijuma primenom rangiranja
Milićević Milić R., i dr.

YUJOR, Yug J Oper Res (2008)
A group decision-making aggregation process
Halouani Nesrin, i dr.

Letop nauč rad Polj fak (2007)
Kompjuterski alati i sistemi za podršku odlučivanju u poljoprivredi
Srđević Bojan, i dr.

prikaži sve [20]