Stochastic multi-attribute acceptability analysis-based heuristic algorithms for multi-attribute project portfolio selection and scheduling problem

References

• Adcock, C. J. (2010). Asset pricing and portfolio selection based on the multivariate extended skew-student-t distribution. Annals of Operations Research, 176(1), 221–234. doi:10.1007/s10479-009-0586-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angilella, S., Corrente, S., Greco, S., & Słowiński, R. (2016). Robust ordinal regression and stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis in multiple criteria hierarchy process for the choquet integral preference model. Omega, 63, 154–169. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2015.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arratia M, N. M., López I, F., Schaeffer, S. E., & Cruz-Reyes, L. (2016). Static R&D project portfolio selection in public organizations. Decision Support Systems, 84, 53–63. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2016.01.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barucke Marcondes, G. A., Leme, R. C., Leme, M. D S., & Sanches da Silva, C. E. (2017). Using mean-gini and stochastic dominance to choose project portfolios with parameter uncertainty. The Engineering Economist, 62(1), 33–53. doi:10.1080/0013791X.2016.1176283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çağlar, M., & Gürel, S. (2019). Impact assessment based sectoral balancing in public R&D project portfolio selection. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 66, 68–81. doi:10.1016/j.seps.2018.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson, C., Fullér, R., Heikkilä, M., & Majlender, P. (2007). A fuzzy approach to R&D project portfolio selection. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 44(2), 93–105. doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2006.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carraway, R. L., & Schmidt, R. L. (1991). Note – An improved discrete dynamic programming algorithm for allocating resources among interdependent projects. Management Science, 37(9), 1195–1200. doi:10.1287/mnsc.37.9.1195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, F. T. S., Kumar, N., Tiwari, M. K., Lau, H. C. W., & Choy, K. L.(2008). Global supplier selection: a fuzzy-AHP approach. International Journal of Production Research, 46(14), 3825–3857. doi:10.1080/00207540600787200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collan, M., & Luukka, P. (2014). Evaluating R&D projects as investments by using an overall ranking from four new fuzzy similarity measure-based TOPSIS variants. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 22(3), 505–515. 260758 doi:10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corrente, S., Figueira, J. R., & Greco, S. (2014). The SMAA-PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research, 239(2), 514–522. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2014.05.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Piante Henriksen, A., & Palocsay, S. W. (2008). An excel-based decision support system for scoring and ranking proposed R&D projects. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 7(3), 529–546. doi:10.1142/S0219622008003022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doerner, K., Gutjahr, W. J., Hartl, R. F., Strauss, C., & Stummer, C. (2004). Pareto ant colony optimization: A metaheuristic approach to multiobjective portfolio selection. Annals of Operations Research, 131(1), 79–99. doi:10.1023/B:ANOR.0000039513.99038.c6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doerner, K. F., Gutjahr, W. J., Hartl, R. F., Strauss, C., & Stummer, C. (2006). Pareto ant colony optimization with ILP preprocessing in multiobjective project portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 171(3), 830–841. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eilat, H., Golany, B., & Shtub, A. (2006). Constructing and evaluating balanced portfolios of R&D projects with interactions: A DEA based methodology. European Journal of Operational Research, 172(3), 1018–1039. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewing, P. L., Jr, Tarantino, W., & Parnell, G. S. (2006). Use of decision analysis in the army base realignment and closure (BRAC) 2005 military value analysis. Decision Analysis, 3(1), 33–49. doi:10.1287/deca.1060.0062
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, E., Lopez, E., Mazcorro, G., Olmedo, R., & Coello Coello, C. A. (2013). Application of the non-outranked sorting genetic algorithm to public project portfolio selection. Information Sciences, 228, 131–149. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2012.11.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, G. E., Baker, N. R., & Bryant, J. L. (1984). Economic models for r and d project selection in the presence of project interactions. Management Science, 30(7), 890–902. doi:10.1287/mnsc.30.7.890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghasemzadeh, F., Archer, N., & Iyogun, P. (1999). A zero-one model for project portfolio selection and scheduling. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(7), 745–755. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golabi, K., Kirkwood, C. W., & Sicherman, A. (1981). Selecting a portfolio of solar energy projects using multiattribute preference theory. Management Science, 27(2), 174–189. doi:10.1287/mnsc.27.2.174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassanzadeh, F., Nemati, H., & Sun, M. (2014). Robust optimization for interactive multiobjective programming with imprecise information applied to R&D project portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 238(1), 41–53. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2014.03.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, C., Chu, P., & Chiang, Y. (2008). A fuzzy AHP application in government-sponsored R&D project selection. Omega, 36(6), 1038–1052. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2006.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jafarzadeh, H., Akbari, P., & Abedin, B. (2018). A methodology for project portfolio selection under criteria prioritisation, uncertainty and projects interdependency – Combination of fuzzy QFD and DEA. Expert Systems with Applications, 110, 237–249. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2018.05.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, J., & Eberhart, R. C. (1997). A discrete binary version of the particle swarm algorithm. 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Computational Cybernetics and Simulation IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICSMC.1997.637339
   Google Scholar
• Khalili-Damghani, K., Sadi-Nezhad, S., & Tavana, M. (2013). Solving multi-period project selection problems with fuzzy goal programming based on TOPSIS and a fuzzy preference relation. Information Sciences, 252, 42–61. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2013.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M., Hiroyasu, T., Miki, M., & Watanabe, S. (2004). SPEA2+: Improving the performance of the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm 2. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature - PPSN VIII, 3242, 742–751.
   Google Scholar
• Kuchta, D. (2001). A fuzzy model for R&D project selection with benefit, outcome and resource interactions. The Engineering Economist, 46, 164–180. doi:10.1080/00137910108967571
   Google Scholar
• Kumar, M., Mittal, M. L., Soni, G., & Joshi, D. (2018). A hybrid TLBO-TS algorithm for integrated selection and scheduling of projects. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 119, 121–130. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2018.03.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahdelma, R., Hokkanen, J., & Salminen, P. (1998). SMAA – Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 106(1), 137–143. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00163-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahdelma, R., Miettinen, K., & Salminen, P. (2003). Ordinal criteria in stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA). European Journal of Operational Research, 147(1), 117–127. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00267-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahdelma, R., & Salminen, P. (2001). SMAA-2: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Operations Research, 49(3), 444–454. doi:10.1287/opre.49.3.444.11220
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahdelma, R., & Salminen, P. (2009). Prospect theory and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA). Omega, 37(5), 961–971. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2008.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, J., & Xu, J. (2013). Multi-objective portfolio selection model with fuzzy random returns and a compromise approach-based genetic algorithm. Information Sciences, 220, 507–521. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2012.07.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, X., Fang, S., Tian, Y., & Guo, X. (2015). Expanded model of the project portfolio selection problem with divisibility, time profile factors and cardinality constraints. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 66(7), 1132–1139. doi:10.1057/jors.2014.75
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liesiö, J., Mild, P., & Salo, A. (2007). Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(3), 1488–1505. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.12.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mavrotas, G., Diakoulaki, D., & Caloghirou, Y. (2006). Project prioritization under policy restrictions. A combination of MCDA with 0–1 programming. European Journal of Operational Research, 171(1), 296–308. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.07.069
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medaglia, A. L., Graves, S. B., & Ringuest, J. L. (2007). A multiobjective evolutionary approach for linearly constrained project selection under uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research, 179(3), 869–894. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.03.068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishra, S. K., Panda, G., & Majhi, R. (2014). Constrained portfolio asset selection using multiobjective bacteria foraging optimization. Operational Research, 14(1), 113–145. doi:10.1007/s12351-013-0138-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mousavi, S. M., Mousavi, M., & Gitinavard, H. (2017). A soft computing based-modified ELECTRE model for renewable energy policy selection with unknown information. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 68, 774–787. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perez, F., & Gomez, T. (2016). Multiobjective project portfolio selection with fuzzy constraints. Annals of Operations Research, 245, 7–29. doi:10.1007/s10479-014-1556-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rabbani, M., Aramoon Bajestani, M., & Baharian Khoshkhou, G. (2010). A multi-objective particle swarm optimization for project selection problem. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(1), 315–321. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.05.056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2011). Teaching–learning-based optimization: A novel method for constrained mechanical design optimization problems. Computer-Aided Design, 43(3), 303–315. doi:10.1016/j.cad.2010.12.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, R. V., Savsani, V. J., & Vakharia, D. P. (2012). Teaching–learning-based optimization: An optimization method for continuous non-linear large scale problems. Information Sciences, 183(1), 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2011.08.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Relich, M., & Pawlewski, P. (2017). A fuzzy weighted average approach for selecting portfolio of new product development projects. Neurocomputing, 231, 19–27. doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2016.05.104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringuest, J. L., Graves, S. B., & Case, R. H. (2004). Mean–Gini analysis in R&D portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(1), 157–169. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00708-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouyendegh, B., & Erol, S. (2012). Selecting the best project using the fuzzy ELECTRE method. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2012, 1–12. doi:10.1155/2012/790142
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, L., Fu, Y., Zhou, P., & Lai, K. K. (2017). Measuring national energy performance via energy trilemma index: A stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Energy Economics, 66, 313–319. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2017.07.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, S., Ang, S., Yang, F., & Xia, Q. (2019). An stochastic multi-attribute acceptability analysis-based method for the multi-attribute project portfolio selection problem with rank-level information. Expert Systems, 2019, e12447. doi:10.1111/exsy.12447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, S., Yang, F., & Xia, Q. (2019). Multi-criteria project portfolio selection and scheduling problem based on acceptability analysis. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 135, 793–799. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2019.06.056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stummer, C., & Heidenberger, K. (2003). Interactive R&D portfolio analysis with project interdependencies and time profiles of multiple objectives. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 50(2), 175–183. doi:10.1109/TEM.2003.810819
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talias, M. A. (2007). Optimal decision indices for R&D project evaluation in the pharmaceutical industry: Pearson index versus Gittins index. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(2), 1105–1112. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.01.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tao, S., & Dong, Z. S. (2017). Scheduling resource-constrained project problem with alternative activity chains. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 114, 288–296. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2017.10.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavana, M., Keramatpour, M., Santos-Arteaga, F. J., & Ghorbaniane, E. (2015). A fuzzy hybrid project portfolio selection method using data envelopment analysis, TOPSIS and integer programming. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(22), 8432–8444. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.06.057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiryaki, F., & Ahlatcioglu, B. (2009). Fuzzy portfolio selection using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Information Sciences, 179(1), 53–69. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2008.07.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, J., & Hwang, W.-L.(2007). A fuzzy set approach for R&D portfolio selection using a real options valuation model. Omega, 35(3), 247–257. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2005.06.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, H., Jiao, W., Lahdelma, R., Zhu, C., & Zou, P. (2015). Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for evaluation of combined heat and power units. Energies, 8(1), 59–78. doi:10.3390/en8010059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Q., Zeng, G., & Tu, X. (2017). Information technology project portfolio implementation process optimization based on complex network theory and entropy. Entropy, 19(6), 287. doi:10.3390/e19060287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., Luo, S., & Gao, J. (2017). Uncertain extensive game with application to resource allocation of national security. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 8(5), 797–808. doi:10.1007/s12652-017-0538-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, Y., Xu, C., Ke, Y., Chen, K., & Sun, X. (2018). An intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria framework for large-scale rooftop PV project portfolio selection: Case study in Zhejiang, China. Energy, 143, 295–309. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.10.105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan, S., & Ji, X. (2018). Portfolio selection model of oil projects under uncertain environment. Soft Computing, 22(17), 5725–5734. doi:10.1007/s00500-017-2619-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, F., Song, S., Huang, W., & Xia, Q.(2015). SMAA-PO: Project portfolio optimization problems based on stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Annals of Operations Research, 233(1), 535–547. doi:10.1007/s10479-014-1583-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, L., Wang, S., Wen, F., & Lai, K. K. (2012). Genetic algorithm-based multi-criteria project portfolio selection. Annals of Operations Research, 197(1), 71–86. doi:10.1007/s10479-010-0819-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu, F., Zhong, P., Wu, Y., Sun, Y., Chen, J., & Jia, B. (2017). SMAA-based stochastic multi-criteria decision making for reservoir flood control operation. Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment, 31(6), 1485–1497. doi:10.1007/s00477-016-1253-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar