Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management (품질경영학회지)

Korean Society for Quality Management (한국품질경영학회)
권호 표지

Determination of Multiplicative Utility Function Based on the Pair-wise Comparisons

쌍대비교에 기반한 승법적 효용함수의 결정

  • Kim, Kyung-Mo (School of Advanced Materials and Systems Engineering, Kumoh National Univeristy of Technology)
  • 김경모 (금오공과대학교 신소재시스템공학부(산업시스템공학))
  • Published : 2005.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The ever increasing demand for enhanced competitiveness of engineered products requires "designing-in-quality" strategies that can effectively and efficiently incorporate concepts of uncertainty and quality into design. Multi-attribute utility function is commonly used to represent the decision-maker's preference on multiple design attributes under conditions of uncertainty and risk. One of the major issues in implementing this approach concerns the generation of appropriate utility function, especially in a complex engineering design environment. Typically, the decision maker's preference is revealed through lottery questions rather than being structured on the deductive reasoning to reflect the nonlinear tradeoffs among the attributes. The use of such intuitive procedures can lead to inexact preference information that may result in inaccuracy and rank reversal problems. This paper presents an alternative procedure based on the pair-wise comparisons between design alternatives towards a consistent preference presentation in assessing multiplicative utility function. The effectiveness of the overall procedures is tested with the aid of an injection-molding process design for a capacitor can and the results are discussed.

Keywords

References

  1. 김성희 외(1999), 의사결정분석 및 응용, 개정판, 영지문화사
  2. 김호성 외(2001), 강건설계를 이용한 품질공학 , 민영사
  3. 박종천, 김경모(2003), '쌍대비교에 기초한 다속성 효용함수의 결정 및 사출성형문제에 대한 응용', 한국소성가공학회 12권, pp. 465-472
  4. Hazerlrigg, G. A.(1996), 'Systems Engineering : A New Framework for Engineering Design', American Siciety of Mechanical Engineers, Dynamic System and Control Division (Publication) DSC, Vol. 60, pp. 39-46
  5. Keeney, R. L. and Raiffa, H.(1993), Decisions with Multiple Objectives : Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, John Wiley & Sons Inc., NY, pp. 282-343
  6. Moldflow manual(1996), Moldflow Pty. Ltd
  7. von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1947), The Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 3rd ed., Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
  8. Ames, A. E., Mattucci, N., MacDonald, S., Szonyi, G., and Hawkins, D. M.(1997), 'Quality Loss Functions for Optimization cross Multiple Response Surfaces', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 29, pp. 339-346
  9. Badinelli, R and Baker, J. R.(1990), 'Multiple Attribute Decision Making with Inexact Value-Function Assessment', Decision Science, Vol. 21, pp. 318-336 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1990.tb01688.x
  10. Bisgaard, S. and Amkenman, B.(1995), 'Analytic Parameter Design', Quality Engineering, Vol. 8, pp. 75-91 https://doi.org/10.1080/08982119508904606
  11. Box, G. E. P. and Liu, P. Y. T.(1999), 'Statistics as a Catalyst to Learning by Scientific Method. Part II-A Discussion', Journal of Quaity Technology, Vol. 31, pp. 16-20
  12. Del Castillo, E. and Montgomery, D. C. (1993), 'A Nonlinear Programming Solution to the Dual Response Problem', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 25, pp. 199-204
  13. Del Castillo, E., Montgomery, D. C. and McCarville, D. R.(1996), 'Modified Desirability Functions for Multiple Response Optimization', Journal of Quality Technology Vol. 28, pp. 337-345
  14. Derringer, G. and Suich, R.(1980), 'Simultaneous Optimization of Several Response Variables', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 12, pp. 214-219
  15. Fichitali, J., Van De Voort, F. R. and Khuri, A. I.(1990), 'Multiresponse Optimization of Acid Casein Production', Journal of Food Process Engineering, Vol. 12, pp. 247-258 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4530.1990.tb00053.x
  16. Fischer, G. W.(1979), 'Utility Models for Multiple Objective Decisions : Do They Accurately Represent Human Preferences?', Decision Sciences, Vol. 10, pp. 451-479 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1979.tb00037.x
  17. Gold, S. and Krishnamurty, S.(1997), 'Trade-offs in Robust Engineering Design', Proceedings of ASME-DETC'97, Sacramento, CA, pp. 1-8
  18. Harrington, E. C., Jr.(1965), 'The Desirability Function', Industrial Quality Control, Vol. 21, pp. 494-498
  19. Khuri, A. I. and Conlon, M.(1981), 'Simultaneous Optimization of Multiple Responses Represented by Polynomial Regression Functions', Technometrics, Vol. 23, pp. 363-375 https://doi.org/10.2307/1268226
  20. Larichev, Q. I. and Moshkovich, H. M. (1995), 'ZAPROS- method and system for rank-ordering of multiattribute alternative', European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 82, pp. 503-521 https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(93)E0143-L
  21. Li, W. and Wu, C. F. J.(1999), 'An Integrated Method of Parameter Design and Tolerance Design', Quality Engineering, Vol. 11, pp. 417-425 https://doi.org/10.1080/08982119908919258
  22. Lind, E. E., Goldin, J. and Hickman, J. B. (1960), 'Fitting Yield and Cost Response Surfaces', Chem. Eng. Prog., Vol. 56, pp. 62-68
  23. Miro-Quesada, G. and Del Castillo, E. (2004), 'Two Approaches for Improving the Dual Response Method in Robust Parameter Design', Jounal of Quality Technology Vol. 36, pp. 154-168
  24. Myers, R. H., Khuri, A. I., and Vining, G. G.(1992), 'Response Surface Alternative to the Taguchi Robust Parameter Design Approach', The American Statistician, Vol. 46, pp. 131-139 https://doi.org/10.2307/2684183
  25. Olson, D. L. and Moshkovich, H. M.(1995), 'Consistency and Accuracy in Decision Aids : Experiments with Four Multiat-tribute Systems', Decision Sciences, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 723-748 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1995.tb01573.x
  26. Ortiz, F., Jr., Simpson, J. R. and Pignatiello, J. J., Jr.(2004), 'A Genetic Algorithm Approach to Multiple-Response Optimization', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 36, pp. 432-450
  27. Pignatiello, J. J., Jr.(1993), 'Strategies for Robust Multi-Response Quality Engineering', IIE Transactions, Vol. 25, pp. 5-15
  28. Romano, D., Varetto, M. and Vicario, G. (2004), 'Multiresponse Robust Design: A General Framework Based on Combined Array', Jounal of Quality Technology, Vol. 36, pp. 27-37
  29. Sykes, E. A. and White, C. C. III. (1991), 'Multiattribute intelligent computer-aided design', IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 1498-1511 https://doi.org/10.1109/21.135692
  30. Thurston, D. L.(1991), 'A Formal Method for Subjective Design Evaluation with Multiple Attributes', Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 3, pp. 105-122 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01581343
  31. Vining, G. G.(1998), 'A Compromise Approach To Multiple Optimization', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 30, pp. 309-313
  32. Vining, G. G. and Myers, R. H.(1990), 'Combining Taguchi and Response Surface Philosophies ?' A Dual Response Approach', Journal of Quality Technology, Vol. 22, pp. 38-45
  33. Yang, J. B. and Sen P.(1996), 'Preference Modeling by Estimating Local Utility Functions for Multiobjective Optimization', European Journal of Operational Research, pp. 115-138
  34. Yao, D.(1998), 'Direct Search-Based Automatic Minimization of Warpage And Weldlines in Injection Molded Parts', Master's Thesis, U. of Massachusetts, MA, pp. 40-88