主管:中国科学院
主办:中国优选法统筹法与经济数学研究会
   中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
论文

基于理想决策单元参照求解策略的DEA交叉效率评价模型

展开
  • 1. 吉林大学管理学院, 吉林 长春 130022;
    2. 海军驻沈阳地区军事代表室, 辽宁 沈阳 110043;
    3. 昆明理工大学管理与经济学院, 云南 昆明 650093
李春好(1967-),男(汉族),辽宁盖州人,吉林大学管理学院教授,博士生导师,博士/出站博士后(日本京都大学);研究方向:复杂系统管理决策.

收稿日期: 2013-01-03

  修回日期: 2013-06-20

  网络出版日期: 2015-02-28

基金资助

国家自然科学基金资助项目(71371083,71261013,70971054);吉林大学"高峰学科"建设工程资助项目(2014GSGL)

DEA Cross-Efficiency Evaluation Model by the Solution Strategy Referring to the Ideal DMU

Expand
  • 1. School of Management, Jilin University, Changchun 130022, China;
    2. Naval Consumer Representative in Shenyang, Shenyang 110043, China;
    3. Faculty of Management and Economics, Kuming University of Science and Technology, Kunming 650093, China

Received date: 2013-01-03

  Revised date: 2013-06-20

  Online published: 2015-02-28

摘要

在已有关于DEA交叉效率评价模型中,激进型模型和仁慈型模型会因评价结果不一致而导致实际应用中难以对它们予以抉择的难题;中立型模型虽在形式上规避了前述问题,但其本身存在着理论偏差。针对上述问题,基于TOPSIS的理想点构造方法,提出了一种关于DEA交叉效率评价的新模型,即基于理想决策单元参照求解策略的DEA交叉效率评价模型。该模型不仅具有理论的严谨性,可以规避激进型模型与仁慈型模型之间的选择难题,而且相对于它们而言能够更好地坚持DEA最有利于被评价决策单元的基本思想。数值模拟分析表明新模型具有解决实际问题的较好适用性。

本文引用格式

李春好, 苏航, 佟轶杰, 孙永河 . 基于理想决策单元参照求解策略的DEA交叉效率评价模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015 , 23(2) : 116 -122 . DOI: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2015.02.014

Abstract

Among the existing DEA cross-efficiency models, aggressive model and benevolent model may lead to inconsistent ranking results which make it hard for decision maker to choose between them.Although neutral model formally solves the problem above, there is obviously a theoretical flaw in it. In view of the above questions, a new DEA cross-efficiency model, DEA cross-efficiency evaluation model by the solution strategy referring to the ideal DMU is proposed in this paper. The new model cannot only keep the decision maker from the dilimma of choosing, but also is better to stick to the DEA basis principle which is in favour of the evaluated DMU by comparing with existing models. Numerical simulation shows that the new model is more applicable to real world decisions.

参考文献

[1] Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1978, 2(6):429-444.

[2] 魏权龄, 张倩伟. DEA的非参数规划收益预测方法[J]. 中国管理科学, 2008, 16(2):25-29.

[3] Sexton T R, Silkman R H, Hogan A J. Data envelopment analysis: critique and extensions[J].New Directions for Program Evaluation,1986,1986(32):73-105.

[4] Liang Liang, Wu Jie, Cook W D,et al. The DEA game cross-efficiency model and its nash equilibrium[J]. Operations Research, 2008, 56(5):1278-1288.

[5] Doyle J, Green R. Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and uses[J]. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1994, 45(5):567-578.

[6] Doyle J R, Green R H. Cross-evaluation in DEA: Improving discrimination among DMUs[J].INFOR, 1995, 33(3):205-222.

[7] Wang Yingming, Chin K S. A neutral DEA model for cross-efficiency evaluation and its extension[J]. Expert Systems with Applications, 2010, 37(5):3666-3675.

[8] Charnes A, Cooper W W. Programming with linear fractional functionals[J]. Naval Res Logist Quart, 1962, 9(1):181-186.

[9] Thompson R G, Lee E, Thrall R M. DEA/AR-efficiency of U.S. independent oil/gas producers over time[J]. Computers and Operations Research, 1992, 19(5):377-391.

[10] Schaible S, Ibaraki T. Fractional programming[J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1983, 12(4):325-338.

[11] Schaible S. Fractional programming on dinkelbach's algorithm[J]. Management Science, 1976, 22(8):868-873.

[12] Hwang C L, Yoon K. Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications[M]. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981.

[13] DeGroot H M, Schervish M J. Probability and statistics[M]. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2002.
文章导航

/