决策单元交叉效率的自适应群评价方法

传统交叉效率评价方法因决策单元偏好权重不唯一而难以操作,因交叉效率有效性分值平均化集结而难以被接受。目前的学者通常围绕决策单元指标权重的确定性分配方法、交叉效率有效性分值的去平均化集结等分别开展研究。本文将交叉效率评价方法中自评互评相结合的评价模式看作群决策过程,即每个决策单元既是一个被评对象,又是一个决策"专家",提出了一种决策单元交叉效率的自适应群评价方法,将决策单元偏好权重的确定和交叉效率有效性分值的去平均化集结作为同一个决策过程,根据每个决策单元的评价结果与群体评价结果的接近程度,同步迭代调整决策单元的"专家"权重和决策单元自评产生的、并提供给其他被评价决策单元的一组确定的偏好指标权重。实验验证与实例运用分析表明,该方法收敛效果良好,能得到客观稳定的决策单元交叉效率有效性分值及排序。     

一种新的基于双前沿面的交叉效率方法及其应用

本文将双前沿面效率评价的思想引入到传统交叉效率模型中，同时，针对双前沿面交叉效率方法中仁慈型和激进型交叉效率策略无法抉择，以及这两种交叉效率策略的应用范围有限的不足，提出了一种新的基于双前沿面的交叉效率方法。该方法的基本思想是选取一个理想决策单元和负理想决策单元，使用被评价决策单元的权重来计算理想决策单元和负理想决策单元的效率，并使被评价决策单元的效率尽可能接近理想解的效率，同时，尽可能远离负理想解的效率。根据该思想，分别在乐观前沿面和悲观前沿面下求解交叉效率值并进行集结，避免了由于前沿面的选择不同导致的差异以及决策者对仁慈型和激进型交叉效率策略进行抉择的困难。最后，将本文方法与现有方法进行对比分析，并将本文方法应用于我国东部地区10个省(直辖市)的创新效率评价中，以验证方法的有效性。     

基于交叉评价策略的DEA全局协调相对效率排序模型

在DEA(数据包络分析)研究领域,建构在交叉效率概念基础上的现有决策单元排序方法仅以定义的方式给出了用于决策单元排序的交叉效率评价值。对于这种方法构建方式,分别基于管理学的效率概念和多属性决策理论,分析指出其中的交叉效率评价值从本质上讲既与效率的管理学概念不符,也与决策单元的优劣不存在理性逻辑联系。为克服现有决策单元排序方法所存在的上述问题,基于交叉评价策略和效率的管理学概念内涵给出了DEA全局协调相对效率的新概念,在此基础上利用优化理论给出了可以用于决策单元优劣排序的DEA全局协调相对效率测度模型,并通过理论分析和数值案例验证解释了该模型相对于现有决策单元排序方法所拥有的比较优势。     

中立型两阶段交叉效率评价方法

在数据包络分析中，已有的两阶段交叉效率评价方法，不仅只能用于基本两阶段网络结构，而且没有中立地分解子阶段效率。文章提出了一个既适用于基本两阶段网络结构，又适用于具有共享输入的两阶段网络结构的，中立型交叉效率评价方法。该方法定义自评时整体效率等于子阶段效率的加权和，在自评整体效率最大的前提下，从使各子阶段效率都尽可能大的角度为每个决策单元分别确定一组最优权重，进而通过互评计算决策单元整体和子阶段的最终效率得分。最后，通过两个实例验证了方法的实用、合理、有效。     

基于理想决策单元参照求解策略的DEA交叉效率评价模型

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。     

区间DEA模型求解算法及其在项目投资效率评价中的应用

当决策单元的变量取值区间范围较大时,经典区间DEA求解算法求得的相对效率区间长度也可能较大,对决策单元有效性的解释力低,很难直观反映相对效率的大小。将决策单元的变量区间划分为若干个子区间,分别计算决策单元在各子区间上的DEA效率,进而求得综合效率区间,作为评价决策单元有效性的基准。综合效率区间的区间长度比经典算法的求解结果小,将新算法应用于投资项目的效率评价,便于对投资项目的效率大小进行比较,进而为项目投资决策提供科学依据。     

基于前景理论和隶属度的混合型多属性决策方法

针对带有决策者期望的混合型多属性决策问题,提出了一种基于前景理论和隶属度的决策分析方法。首先依据决策者对各个属性的期望,将具有清晰数、区间数和语义短语三种形式的决策矩阵转化成为前景决策矩阵。然后,根据各个方案与决策期望之间的广义加权欧氏距离,建立了可变模糊模式识别模型,并通过构造拉格朗日松弛函数,进行交叉迭代计算,得到各个方案的最优隶属度以及对应的属性权重,在此基础上,通过合成各个方案的累计前景值与隶属度,得到方案的综合前景值,并依据综合前景值的大小进行方案排序。最后通过一个原油管道路线优选实例,表明了该方法的可行性与有效性。     

基于交叉效率和合作博弈的决策单元排序方法

在数据包络分析中，大量的交叉效率模型已被提出。然而选择不同的目标模型将实现不一样的交叉效率评价。本文基于针对单个决策单元实施的对抗型和仁慈型两个交叉效率模型，用合作博弈方法来研究交叉效率模型的选取，并利用Shapley值对决策单元进行排序。最后通过实例分析显示该排序方法充分利用了最小交叉效率和最大交叉效率的信息完全排序了所有决策单元，具有一定的综合性和合理性。     

未确知理论在企业信息化水平评价中的应用

本文在分析了影响企业信息化水平的评价指标后,建立了企业信息化实施水平的未确知测度模型,并将该模型应用到企业信息化水平的评价中,实现了有结构决策和无结构决策的结合。评价过程中一级指标的权重由AHM确定,二级指标的权重由信息熵确定,同时由于评价结果划分的有序性,本文采用置信度识别准则进行识别,文章最后以实例解释了模型的计算过程,验证了该方法的可行性、科学性和实用性。     

基于数据包络分析的综合因子绩效评价模型

本文在数据包络分析(简称DEA)进行效率分析的原理上,将由DEA得到的实际有效生产函数与理论生产函数结合起来,提出了工业企业或地区工业发展的综合因子绩效评价模型.综合因子绩效评价方法概括综合了现用绩效指标,能在同一标准下对多决策单元在多时期内的绩效进行指标评价和相对绩效评价,后者能消除客观基础条件对绩效评价的影响;在决策单元的基础条件差异复杂时,两种评价方法互为补充,评价结果能准确反映决策者的业绩和评价单元的发展能力.     

The use of OWA operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation

Cross-efficiency evaluation is an effective way of ranking decision making units (DMUs) in data envelopment analysis (DEA). Existing approaches for cross-efficiency evaluation are mainly focused on the calculation of cross-efficiency matrix, but pay little attention to the aggregation of the efficiencies in the cross-efficiency matrix. The most widely used approach is to aggregate the efficiencies in each row or column in the cross-efficiency matrix with equal weights into an average cross-efficiency score for each DMU and view it as the overall performance measurement of the DMU. This paper focuses on the aggregation process of the efficiencies in the cross-efficiency matrix and proposes the use of ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation. The use of OWA operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation allows the decision maker (DM)’s optimism level towards the best relative efficiencies, characterized by an orness degree, to be taken into consideration in the final overall efficiency assessment and particularly in the selection of the best DMU.     

DEA game cross-efficiency approach to Olympic rankings

A number of studies have used data envelopment analysis (DEA) to evaluate the performance of the countries in Olympic games. While competition exists among the countries in Olympic games/rankings, all these DEA studies do not model competition among peer decision making units (DMUs) or countries. These DEA studies find a set of weights/multipliers that keep the efficiency scores of all DMUs at or below unity. Although cross efficiency goes a further step by providing an efficiency measure in terms of the best multiplier bundle for the unit and all the other DMUs, it is not always unique. This paper presents a new and modified DEA game cross-efficiency model where each DMU is viewed as a competitor via non-cooperative game. For each competing DMU, a multiplier bundle is determined that optimizes the efficiency score for that DMU, with the additional constraint that the resulting score should be at or above that DMU 's estimated best performance. The problem, of course, arises that we will not know this best performance score for the DMU under evaluation until the best performances of all other DMUs are known. To combat this “chicken and egg” phenomenon, an iterative approach leading to the Nash equilibrium is presented. The current paper provides a modified variable returns to scale (VRS) model that yields non-negative cross-efficiency scores. The approach is applied to the last six Summer Olympic Games. Our results may indicate that our game cross-efficiency model implicitly incorporates the relative importance of gold, silver and bronze medals without the need for specifying the exact assurance regions.     

Konsensuale Effizenzbewertung und -verbesserung mittels DEA

This contribution is a new DEA approach in as much as it permits the decision making units (DMUs) to improve their respective efficiencies from the view of a peer rather than form their own self-appraisal attitudes. These authors study the output oriented model under constant scale efficiencies and first develop how a DMU can improve its performance by radial output increase or even by free output variation??in the light of the weight system of an arbitrary peer. The results are an improved cross-efficiency matrix and a maximum cross-efficiency matrix. Either of these matrices may serve as an appropriate instrument for a consensual choice of a peer??consensual among all DMUs. Input oriented models as well as simultaneous input/output considerations amend the so far developed results. A suitable example demonstrates all aspects of the new approach.     

Exploiting value system multiplicity and preference voting for robust ranking

Under a data envelopment analysis (DEA) framework, full ranking of a group of decision making units (DMUs) can be carried out through an adequate amalgamation of the cross-efficiency (CE henceforth) scores produced for each DMU. In this paper, we propose a ranking procedure that is based on amalgamating the weight profiles selected over the cross-evaluation rather than related CE scores. The new approach builds, for each DMU, a collective weight profile (CWP henceforth) by exploiting the preference voting system embedded within the matrix of weights, which views the assessing DMUs as voters and the input/output factors as candidates. The occurrence of zero votes is discussed as a special case and a two-level aggregation procedure is developed. The CWPs that are produced extend the concept of collective appreciation to the input/output factors of each DMU so that group dynamics is truly reflected, mainly in decision making circumstances where factor prioritization is necessary for making choices or allocating resources. The robustness of the proposed ranking approach is evaluated with three examples drawn from the literature.     

基于DEA联盟博弈核仁解的固定成本分摊方法研究

本文结合DEA(Data Envelopment Analysis)和联盟博弈理论研究了固定成本分摊问题.本文首先证明了在固定成本作为决策单元(Decision Making Unit,DMU)新投入要素的条件下,那么DMU个体和整体将同为DEA有效,在此结论的基础上,本文结合联盟博弈理论,定义了联盟博弈的特征函数,提出了基于核仁解的固定成本分摊模型,并给出了相应的求解算法,最终通过算例说明了本文方法的合理性和求解算法的可行性.     

Common benchmarking and ranking of units with DEA

This paper develops a common framework for benchmarking and ranking units with DEA. In many DEA applications, decision making units (DMUs) experience similar circumstances, so benchmarking analyses in those situations should identify common best practices in their management plans. We propose a DEA-based approach for the benchmarking to be used when there is no need (nor wish) to allow for individual circumstances of the DMUs. This approach identifies a common best practice frontier as the facet of the DEA efficient frontier spanned by the technically efficient DMUs in a common reference group. The common reference group is selected as that which provides the closest targets. A model is developed which allows us to deal not only with the setting of targets but also with the measurement of efficiency, because we can define efficiency scores of the DMUs by using the common set of weights (CSW) it provides. Since these weights are common to all the DMUs, the resulting efficiency scores can be used to derive a ranking of units. We discuss the existence of alternative optimal solutions for the CSW and find the range of possible rankings for each DMU which would result from considering all these alternate optima. These ranking ranges allow us to gain insight into the robustness of the rankings.     

基于最近距离投影的DEA两阶段效率评价方法研究

数据包络分析是进行效率评价最重要的方法之一。传统的数据包络分析理论主要寻找有效前沿面上的最远距离投影，在极大化无效性指数的同时也面临着效率改进的巨大难度和高额成本。对于具有两阶段内部生产结构的决策单元，本文从考虑最小改进难度的视角出发，提出了最近距离投影的两阶段效率评价方法。该方法首先得到所有强有效决策单元的线性组合，且这些组合均占优于被评价的两阶段决策单元。然后建立了两阶段范围调整效率评价模型，在确定具有最近投影距离的占优组合的同时，得到了两阶段评价效率。最后，本文运用我国32家上市银行的年度数据对所提出方法进行了应用验证。     

Allocating a fixed cost based on data envelopment analysis and satisfaction degree

This paper uses the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) technique to solve the problem of allocating a fixed cost across a set of comparable decision making units (DMUs) in a fair way. It first investigates the effect of the fixed cost on each DMU and on the collection of DMUs. Next we prove that there exist some cost allocations which can make each DMU and the collection of DMUs efficient. We show that such a cost allocation is unique and equivalent to the proportional sharing method if the fixed cost allocation problem is a one-dimensional case. In a multidimensional case, the fixed cost allocations may not be unique. This paper defines the concept of satisfaction degree, and proposes a maxmin model and a corresponding algorithm to generate a unique fixed cost allocation. Finally, the proposed approach has been applied to a data set from prior literature.