Multi-Attribute Decision Making Using Hypothetical Equivalents and Inequivalents

[+] Author and Article Information
Tung-King See, Ashwin Gurnani, Kemper Lewis

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Buffalo, 1010 Furnas Hall, Buffalo NY 14260

J. Mech. Des 126(6), 950-958 (Feb 14, 2005) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1814389 History: Received April 03, 2003; Revised March 17, 2004; Online February 14, 2005
Copyright © 2004 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Chen,  W., Lewis,  K. E., and Schmidt,  L., 2000, “Decision-Based Design: An Emerging Design Perspective,” Engineering Valuation & Cost Analysis, Special Edition on “Decision Based Design: Status & Promise,” 3(1), pp. 57–66.
Hazelrigg,  G. A., 1998, “A Framework for Decision-Based Engineering Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 120, pp. 653–658.
Wassenaar,  H. J., and Chen,  W., 2003, “An Approach to Decision-Based Design With Discrete Choice Analysis for Demand Modeling,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 125(3), pp. 490–497.
Urban, G. L., and Hauser, J. R., 1993, Design and Marketing of New Products, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Saari,  D. G., 2000, “Mathematical Structure of Voting Paradoxes. I; Pair-Wise Vote. II; Positional Voting,” Economic Theory, 15, pp. 1–103.
Matheson, D., and Matheson, J., 1998, The Smart Organization, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Jetblue Airway, 2001, http://www.jetblue.com
Airbus, 2001, “A330/A340 Family,” http://www.airbus.com
Boeing, 2001, “Commercial Airplane Info,” http://www.boeing.com/commercial/flash.html
Saaty, T. L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Fukuda, S., and Matsura, Y., 1993, “Prioritizing the Customer’s Requirements by AHP for Concurrent Design,” Design for Manufacturability, ASME, 52 , pp. 13–19.
Davis,  L., and Williams,  G., 1994, “Evaluating and Selecting Simulation Software Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 5(1), pp. 23–32.
Basak,  I., and Saaty,  T. L., 1993, “Group Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Math. Comput. Modell., 17(4–5), pp. 101–110.
Hamalainen,  R. P., and Ganesh,  L. S., 1994, “Group Preference Aggregration Methods Employed in AHP: An Evaluation and an Intrinsic Process for Deriving Members’ Weightages,” European Journal of Operational Research,79(2), pp. 249–265.
Arrow, K. J., 1951, Social Choice and Individual Values, Wiley, New York.
Barzilai, J., Cook, W. D., and Golany, B., 1992, “The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Structure of the Problem and Its Solutions,” in Systems and Management Science by Extremal Methods, F. Y. Phillips and J. J. Rousseau, eds., Kluwer Academic, Boston, MA, pp. 361–371.
Barzilai,  J., and Golany,  B., 1990, “Deriving Weights From Pairwise Comparison Matrices: The Additive Case,” Operations Research Letters,96, pp. 407–410.
US News and World Report, 2003, “Graduate School Rankings,” http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/rankindex.htm
Peter,  H., and Wakker,  P., 1991, “Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives and Revealed Group Preferences,” Econom. J., 59(6), pp. 1787–1801.
Callaghan, A., and Lewis, K., 2000, “A 2-Phase Aspiration-Level and Utility Theory Approach to Large Scale Design,” ASME Design Automation Conference, Baltimore, MD, DETC00/DTM-14569.
Thurston,  D. L., 1991, “A Formal Method for Subjective Design Evaluation With Multiple Attributes, Research in Engineering Design,” Res. Eng. Des., 3, pp. 105–122.
Messac,  A., Sundararaj,  J. G., Tappeta,  R. V., and Renaud,  J. E., 2000, “Ability of Objective Functions to Generate Points on Non-Convex Pareto Frontiers,” AIAA J., 38(6), pp. 1084–1091.
Chen,  W., Wiecek,  M., and Zhang,  J., 1999, “Quality Utility: A Compromise Programming Approach to Robust Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 121(2), pp. 179–187.
Dennis,  J. E., and Das,  I., 1997, “A Closer Look at Drawbacks of Minimizing Weighted Sums of Objective for Pareto Set Generation in Multicriteria Optimization Problems,” Struct. Optim., 14(1), pp. 63–69.
Zhang,  J., Chen,  W., and Wiecek,  M., 2000, “Local Approximation of the Efficient Frontier in Robust Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 122(2), pp. 232–236.
Watson,  S. R., and Freeling,  A. N. S., 1982, “Assessing Attribute Weights,” Omega, 10(6), pp. 582–583.
Wu, G., 1996, “Exercises on Tradeoffs and Conflicting Objectives,” Harvard Business School Case Studies, 9-396-307.
Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H., 1993, Decisions With Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Scott, M. J., and Antonsson, E. K., 2000, “Using Indifference Points in Engineering Decisions,” in 12th ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, DETC2000/DTM-14559.
Thurston,  D. L., 2001, “Real and Misconceived Limitations to Decision Based Design With Utility Analysis,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 123(2), pp. 176–182.
See, T. K., and Lewis, K., 2002, “Multi-Attribute Decision Making Using Hypothetical Equivalents,” ASME Design Technical Conferences, Design Automation Conference, DETC02/DAC-02030.
Yu, P.-L., 1985, Multiple-Criteria Decision Making: Concepts, Techniques and Extensions, Plenum Press, New York, Chap. 6, pp. 113–161.
Keeney, R. L., 1996, Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Montgomery, D. C., 1997, Design and Analysis of Experiments, 4th ed., Wiley, New York.
Atkinson, A. C., and Donev, A. N., 1992, Optimum Experimental Designs, Oxford University Press, New York.
Vanderplaats, G. N., 1999, Numerical Optimization Techniques for Engineering Design, 3rd ed., Vanderplaats Research & Development, Inc., Colorado Springs, CO.
Phadke, M. S., 1989, Quality Engineering Using Robust Design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Neider, J., Davis, T., and Woo, M., 1994, OpenGL Programming Guide, Release 1, Addison-Wesley, Reading MA.
Gurnani, A. P., See, T. K., and Lewis, K., 2003, “An Approach to Robust Multi-Attribute Concept Selection,” ASME Design Technical Conferences, Design Automation Conference, DETC03/DAC-48707.
Keeney,  R. L., 1976, “A Group Preference Axiomatization With Cardinal Utility,” Manage. Sci., 23(2), pp. 140–145.


Grahic Jump Location
Strength of preference for cruise speed, range, and number of passengers
Grahic Jump Location
Final feasible space including all constraints specified in Eq. (6)



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In