A Posterior Preference Articulation Method to Dual-Response Surface Optimization: Selection of the Most Preferred Solution Using TOPSIS

쌍대반응표면최적화를 위한 사후선호도반영법: TOPSIS를 활용한 최고선호해 선택

  • Received : 2018.04.16
  • Accepted : 2018.05.22
  • Published : 2018.06.30


Response surface methodology (RSM) is one of popular tools to support a systematic improvement of quality of design in the product and process development stages. It consists of statistical modeling and optimization tools. RSM can be viewed as a knowledge management tool in that it systemizes knowledge about a manufacturing process through a big data analysis on products and processes. The conventional RSM aims to optimize the mean of a response, whereas dual-response surface optimization (DRSO), a special case of RSM, considers not only the mean of a response but also its variability or standard deviation for optimization. Recently, a posterior preference articulation approach receives attention in the DRSO literature. The posterior approach first seeks all (or most) of the nondominated solutions with no articulation of a decision maker (DM)'s preference. The DM then selects the best one from the set of nondominated solutions a posteriori. This method has a strength that the DM can understand the trade-off between the mean and standard deviation well by looking around the nondominated solutions. A posterior method has been proposed for DRSO. It employs an interval selection strategy for the selection step. This strategy has a limitation increasing inefficiency and complexity due to too many iterations when handling a great number (e.g., thousands ~ tens of thousands) of nondominated solutions. In this paper, a TOPSIS-based method is proposed to support a simple and efficient selection of the most preferred solution. The proposed method is illustrated through a typical DRSO problem and compared with the existing posterior method.


Supported by : 대구대학교


  1. 봉동원, 최수영, 이희석 2007. "지식경영시스템 품질 영향 요인 분석: 기술 및 과업 특성 관점에서," 지식경영연구 (8:2), pp. 31-52.
  2. 이순룡 2012. 현대품질경영(제2수정판), 서울: 법문사.
  3. 표인수, 이재광 2016. "QFD를 이용한 기업 법무 서비스 품질 측정 및 개선에 관한 연구," 지식경영연구 (17:2), pp. 1-26.
  4. Box, G. E. P. and Draper, N. R. 1987. Empirical Model Building and Response Surfaces, New York: John Wiley & Sons,.
  5. Haimes, Y. Y. Lasdon, L. S. and Wismer, D. A. 1971. "On a Bicriterion Formulation of the Problems of Integrated System Identification and System Optimization," IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (1), pp. 296-297.
  6. Hwang, C. L., Masud, A. S. M.; Paidy, S. R., and Yoon, K. 1979. Multiple Objective Decision Making - Methods and Applications (Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems), Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  7. Hwang, C. L. and Yoon, K. 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making - Methods and Applications: A State of the Art Survey, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  8. Khuri, A, I. and Cornell, J. A. 1996. Response Surfaces: Designs and Analyses, New York: Dekker.
  9. Kim, K., Jun, C., Cho, H., Hong, Y., Kim, Y., Kim, C., Youm, S., Lee, S., Lee, J., Chang, B., Jeong, B., and Jeong, I. 2000. Development of a Six-Sigma Improvement Model: Reducing the Variation of Tin Plates" Hardness, Republic of Korea: POSCO Technical Report.
  10. Lee, D., Jeong, I., and Kim, K. 2010. "A Posterior Preference Articulation Approach to Dual-Response-Surface Optimization," IIE Transactions (42), pp. 161-171.
  11. Myers, R. H. and Montgomery, D. C. 2002. Response Surface Methodology ( 2nd ed.), New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  12. Steuer, R. E. 1986. Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  13. Vining, G. G. and Myers, R. H. 1990. "Combining Taguchi and Response Surface Philosophies: A Dual Response Approach," Journal of Quality Technology (22), pp. 38-45.