確定性與模糊性多準則模式於決策問題差異性之個案探討分析

Case Studies on the Discrepancy of Multi-Criterion Decision Making between Deterministic and Fuzzy Approaches

陳姿蓉(Tzu-Jung Chen)

指導教授 ： 徐旭昇

元智大學/工程學院/工業工程與管理學系/碩士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6838/YZU.2013.00163

摘要

決策問題常在公司產業、政府決策中出現，當面臨重要決策時，往往需要群體專家共同參與，以選擇最適合之方案，此時多準則決策分析方法時常為最佳工具之一。本研究提出SMART及TOPSIS方法及其相關應用，使用兩個實例進行個案研究，一為決策資源資訊系統之遴選，此實例源自於發表之論文；二為校園內智慧型販賣機設點決策，做為本研究所提出探討之個案。
研究使用SMART與TOPSIS兩種決策手法，在決策過程中採用明確及模糊兩種數值表達形式。TOPSIS之概念，是藉由各方案對於正/負理想解之距離遠近比值，做出排序。研究中並探討TOPSIS在不同標準化方式與距離算法做差異性討論分析。
個案2之準則由決策小組，使用腦力激盪法及實際觀察方式建構初步目標層級架構及候選方案，準則內容經由Kano二維品質模式方法整合專家意見刪除相對不重要之選項，問卷皆由語意方式評分。模糊數能表達準則評分時不確定空間，更貼切表達決策者之真實意見，方案之間使用模糊數值表達之結果將會與準確數值結果較接近。數據計算結果經由三種解模糊方法排序機臺設置地點，結果為兩種決策手法之校園地點選擇優先順序皆一致，同時五個方案排序之間分數差距皆很明顯。

關鍵字

多屬性決策分析 ； SMART ； TOPSIS ； 模糊理論 ； Kano二維品質模式

並列摘要

This thesis aims to investigate the discrepancy between decision making based on deterministic approach and fuzzy approach. Two selection problems are examined; one is selecting USB cables supplier, and the other is selecting a location in a campus that will generate most business benefit of a fashion and intelligent vending machine. For the first supplier section problem, an example and data set is taken from Chou and Chang (2008). In the method, Fuzzy SMART was applied to aggregate experts’ opinions and to calculate each attribute weight. Then three alternatives are compared using SMART and TOPSIS methods in both crisp and fuzzy modes. We found that the ranking of these alternatives are the same since the five experts’ evaluations on many aspects do not deviate much.
The second study focus on a location selection problem of placing a fashion and intelligent vending machine at a college campus in north Taiwan. Four steps are taken to reach a conclusion: (1) Employ brainstorm method to establish an initial hierarchical decision criteria structure, as well as five alternative locations; (2) apply two-dimensional fuzzy Kano’s model to integrate experts’ opinion and eliminate attributes of lower importance; (3) use fuzzy SMART to aggregate the experts’ evaluations and compute the weight of each attribute, (4) rank the five alternatives using crisp/fuzzy SMART and TOPSIS. The numerical results indicate that the four methods produce the same ranking for the five alternatives, and the score differences are significant between any two consecutive ranking alternatives.

並列關鍵字

Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) ； SMART ； TOPSIS ； Fuzzy Theory ； Kano’s Model

參考文獻

58. 宋致均 (2010)，「企業永續發展之碳管理決策」，清華大學，碩士論文。

65. 陳昱志 (2006)，「應用模糊多準則決策法於ASP廠商關鍵能力之評估」，長榮大學，碩士論文。

2. Ashtiani B., Haghighirad F., Makui A. & ali Montazer G. (2009), Extension of fuzzy TOPSIS method based n interval-valued fuzzy sets, Applied Soft Computing, 9:457-461.

3. Baas S.M. & Kwakernaak H. (1977), Rating and rnaking of multiple-aspect alternatives using fuzzy sets, Automatica, 13(1):79-58.

4. Bobylev N. (2011), Comparative analysis of environmental of selected underground construction technologies using the analytic network process, Automation in Construction, 20: 1030-1040.