Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering (산업경영시스템학회지)

Society of Korea Industrial and System Engineering (한국산업경영시스템학회)
권호 표지

Extensions on The Fixed Weighting Nature of Cross-Evaluation Model

교차 평가 모델의 고정 가중치 유형의 확장 연구

  • Choi, Sung-Kyun (Research Institute, Korean National Railroad Corp.) ;
  • Yang, Jae-Kyung (Dept. of Industrial and Information Systems Eng, Chonbuk National University)
  • 최성균 (한국철도공사 연구원) ;
  • 양재경 (전북대학교 산업정보시스템공학과)
  • Received : 2012.02.03
  • Accepted : 2012.03.13
  • Published : 2012.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

DEA 모델중 널리 사용되는 교차평가모델(cross efficiency model)은 가중치에 제한을 두지 않고 어떤 특정분야에 탁월한 성과를 내는 DMU(Decision Making Unit)보다는 보다 전반적인 분야에서 두각을 나타내는 DMU를 선발함으로써 많은 연구자들이 DEA문헌에서 적용하여 왔다. 본 연구에서는 이러한 교차평가모델이 실제에 있어서는 암묵적으로 고정 가중치를 사용한다는 것과 동일한 결과를 나타낸다는 것을 분석적으로 밝혔다(one input, multi output case). 또한 multi-input, multi-output case의 경우에도 overall performer의 cluster에 근접한 대다수 DMU의 경우에는 고정 가중치를 사용한 경우와 거의 차이가 없음을 보였다. 교차평가 모델에 적용된 변수의 가중치를 보다 명확히 함으로써 연구자들이 모델의 평가결과를 이해하는데 도움이 될 수 있을 것이다. 또한 교차 평가의 가중치 도식을 더 명확히 보여주기 위해 biplot을 제안한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson, T. R., Hollingsworth, K., and Inman, L.; "The Fixed Weighting Nature of a Cross-Evaluation Model," Journal of Productivity Analysis, 17(3) : 249-255, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015012121760
  2. Doyle, J. R. and Green, R. H.; "Data Envelopment Analysis and Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Omega, International journal of Management Science, 21 : 713-715, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(93)90013-B
  3. Doyle, J. R. and Green, R. H.; "Efficiency and Coss-efficiency in DEA : Derivations, Meanings and Uses," Journal of the Operational Research Society, 45 : 567-578, 1995.
  4. Doyle, J. R. and Green, R. H.; "Cross-evaluation in DEA : Improving Discrimination among DMUs," INFOR, 33 : 205-222, 1995.
  5. Mareschal, B. and Brans, J.-P.; "Geometrical representations for MCDA," European Journal of Operational Research, 34 : 69-77, 1988. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(88)90456-0
  6. Martić, M. and Savić, G.; "An application of DEA for comparative analysis and ranking of regions in Serbia with regards to social-economic development," European Journal of Operational Research, 132 : 343-356, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00156-9
  7. Raveh, A.; "Co-plot : A graphic display method for geometrical representations of MCDM," European Journal of Operational Research, 125 : 670-678, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00276-3
  8. Sarkis, J.; "A comparative analysis of DEA as a discrete alternative multiple criteria decision tool," European Journal of Operational Research, 123 : 543-557, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00099-5
  9. Zhu, J.; "Data envelopment analysis vs principal component analysis : An illustrative study of economic performance of Chinese cities," European Journal of Operational Research, 111 : 50-61, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00321-4
  10. Talluri, S., Whiteside, M. M., and Seipel, S. J.; "A nonparametric stochastic procedure for FMS evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, 124 : 529-538, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00188-5
  11. Cook, W. D., Doyle, J., Green, R., and Kress, M.; "Ranking Players in Multiple Tournaments," Computers and Operations Research, 23(9) : 869, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(95)00082-8
  12. Sexton, T. R., Silkman, R. H., and Hogan, A.; "Data Envelopment Analysis : Critique and extensions," In Measuring Efficiency : An Assessment of Data Envelopment Analysis, (Silkman, R. H. Ed.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 73-104, 1986.
  13. Shang, J. and Sueyoshi, T.; "A unified framework for the selection of a Flexible ManufacturingSystem," European Journal of Operational Research, 85 : 297-315, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(94)00041-A