Goal Programming, Compromise Programming and Reference Point Method Formulations: Linkages and Utility Interpretations

This paper looks at connections between the multi-criteria techniques of goal programming, compromise programming, and the reference point method. The utility function structure of each method is examined and interpretation of the techniques in terms of pareto efficiency and the equilibrated nature...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of the Operational Research Society. - Taylor & Francis, Ltd.. - 49(1998), 9, Seite 986-991
1. Verfasser: Romero, C. (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Tamiz, M., Jones, D. F.
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 1998
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:The Journal of the Operational Research Society
Schlagworte:MCDM Compromise Programming Goal Programming Reference Point Method Utility Theory Behavioral sciences Economics Linguistics Physical sciences Applied sciences Mathematics
LEADER 01000caa a22002652 4500
001 JST050595776
003 DE-627
005 20240621182355.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 150324s1998 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.2307/3010172  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)JST050595776 
035 |a (JST)3010172 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Romero, C.  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Goal Programming, Compromise Programming and Reference Point Method Formulations: Linkages and Utility Interpretations 
264 1 |c 1998 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This paper looks at connections between the multi-criteria techniques of goal programming, compromise programming, and the reference point method. The utility function structure of each method is examined and interpretation of the techniques in terms of pareto efficiency and the equilibrated nature of the solution is given. Means of ensuring pareto efficiency whilst maintaining as much as possible the equilibrated character are given for a certain class of model. Methods for ensuring conceptual correctness and computational accuracy by reducing reference point models to equivalent goal programmes are given. The findings are illustrated by means of an example. 
540 |a Copyright 1998 Operational Research Society Ltd 
650 4 |a MCDM 
650 4 |a Compromise Programming 
650 4 |a Goal Programming 
650 4 |a Reference Point Method 
650 4 |a Utility Theory 
650 4 |a Behavioral sciences  |x Psychology  |x Cognitive psychology  |x Cognitive processes  |x Decision making  |x Decision analysis  |x Goal programming 
650 4 |a Economics  |x Economic principles  |x Economic efficiency  |x Pareto principle  |x Pareto efficiency 
650 4 |a Linguistics  |x Language  |x Lexicology  |x Lexicography 
650 4 |a Behavioral sciences  |x Psychology  |x Cognitive psychology  |x Decision theory  |x Operations research 
650 4 |a Economics  |x Microeconomics  |x Economic utility  |x Utility functions 
650 4 |a Physical sciences  |x Earth sciences  |x Geography  |x Geodesy  |x Cartography  |x Map features  |x Contour lines 
650 4 |a Applied sciences  |x Computer science  |x Computer engineering  |x Computer software 
650 4 |a Mathematics  |x Applied mathematics  |x Statistics  |x Applied statistics  |x Statistical models  |x Parametric models 
650 4 |a Applied sciences  |x Research methods  |x Modeling 
650 4 |a Applied sciences  |x Computer science  |x Computer programming  |x Mathematical programming  |x Linear programming  |x Technical Notes 
655 4 |a research-article 
700 1 |a Tamiz, M.  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Jones, D. F.  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t The Journal of the Operational Research Society  |d Taylor & Francis, Ltd.  |g 49(1998), 9, Seite 986-991  |w (DE-627)320465098  |w (DE-600)2007775-0  |x 14769360  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:49  |g year:1998  |g number:9  |g pages:986-991 
856 4 0 |u https://www.jstor.org/stable/3010172  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.2307/3010172  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_JST 
912 |a GBV_ILN_11 
912 |a GBV_ILN_20 
912 |a GBV_ILN_22 
912 |a GBV_ILN_23 
912 |a GBV_ILN_24 
912 |a GBV_ILN_31 
912 |a GBV_ILN_39 
912 |a GBV_ILN_40 
912 |a GBV_ILN_60 
912 |a GBV_ILN_62 
912 |a GBV_ILN_63 
912 |a GBV_ILN_65 
912 |a GBV_ILN_69 
912 |a GBV_ILN_70 
912 |a GBV_ILN_90 
912 |a GBV_ILN_100 
912 |a GBV_ILN_110 
912 |a GBV_ILN_187 
912 |a GBV_ILN_224 
912 |a GBV_ILN_285 
912 |a GBV_ILN_370 
912 |a GBV_ILN_374 
912 |a GBV_ILN_702 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2001 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2003 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2005 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2006 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2007 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2008 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2009 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2010 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2011 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2014 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2015 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2018 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2020 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2021 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2026 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2027 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2034 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2044 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2050 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2056 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2057 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2061 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2107 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2111 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2129 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2190 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2507 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2935 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2940 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2949 
912 |a GBV_ILN_2950 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4012 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4035 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4037 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4046 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4112 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4126 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4242 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4251 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4305 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4306 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4307 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4313 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4322 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4323 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4324 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4325 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4335 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4346 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4393 
912 |a GBV_ILN_4700 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 49  |j 1998  |e 9  |h 986-991