Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An induced OWA aggregation operator with dual preference setting for DEA cross-efficiency ranking

  • Mathematical methods in data science
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cross-efficiency (CE) evaluation is an extension of the data envelopment analysis approach that allows decision making units (DMUs) to assess their peers by means of their own appreciation weights. As a result, each DMU is presented with a vector of CE scores, which need to undergo an aggregation operation to yield the ultimate ranking score. The aggregation is commonly carried out through an appropriate aggregation operator. In this paper, we propose an induced ordered weighted averaging (IOWA) operator with dual preference setting (2-IOWA) as a new aggregation device. The 2-IOWA aggregation novelty resides in its twined order inducing variables, which are defined by exploiting exclusively the appreciative properties of the CE matrix. The first-order inducing variable is the voting rank order that characterizes the preference voting system embedded within the CE matrix. The corresponding IOWA-level 1 aggregation produces a composite vote for each DMU by employing as arguments the individual votes assigned to it. The second-order inducing variable is represented by these composite votes, which are adopted to induce a common order on the rows of the CE matrix as a part of the IOWA-level 2 aggregation. The 2-IOWA aggregation process is conducted with OWA weights that are generated through different minimax disparity models by using different optimism level values in order to corroborate the influence of subjectivity on the structure of the ranking patterns besides evaluating the robustness of the proposed methodological framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data used for the current study are provided in the Appendix.

References

  • Aggarwal M (2015) A new family of induced OWA operators. Int J Intell Syst 30(2):170–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad S, Alnowibet K, Alqasem L, Merigo JM, Zaindin M (2021) Generalized OWA operators for uncertain queuing modeling with application in healthcare. Soft Comput 25(6):4951–4962

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Mezeini N, Oukil A, Al-Ismaili A (2020) Investigating the efficiency of greenhouse production in Oman: a two-stage approach based on data envelopment analysis and double bootstrapping. J Clean Prod 247:119160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amarante M (2017) Mm-OWA: a generalization of OWA operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(4):2099–2106

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Amin GR, Emrouznejad A (2006) An extended minimax disparity to determine the OWA operator weights. Comput Ind Eng 50(3):312–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin GR, Emrouznejad A (2011) Parametric aggregation in ordered weighted averaging. Int J Approx Reason 52(6):819–827

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Amin GR, Oukil A (2019) Gangless cross-evaluation in DEA: an application to stock selection. RAIRO Oper Res 53(2):645–655

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Angiz MZ, Mustafa A, Kamali MJ (2013) Cross-ranking of decision making units in data envelopment analysis. Appl Math Model 37(1–2):398–405

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Aristondo O, Ciommi M (2016) The decompositions of rank-dependent poverty measures using ordered weighted averaging operators. Int J Approx Reason 76:47–62

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Banker RD, Charnes A, Cooper WW (1984) Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Manag Sci 30(9):1078–1092

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Beliakov G, James S (2011) Induced ordered weighted averaging operators. In: Yager RR, Kacprzyk J, Beliakov G. (eds) Recent developments in the ordered weighted averaging operators: theory and practice. Springer, Berlin, pp 29–47

  • Beliakov G, James S, Wu J (2020) Discrete fuzzy measures. Springer International Publishing, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Borrás F, Ruiz JL, Sirvent I (2023) Peer evaluation through cross-efficiency based on reference sets. Omega 114:102739

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes A, Cooper WW, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen ZS, Yu C, Chin KS, Martínez L (2019) An enhanced ordered weighted averaging operators generation algorithm with applications for multicriteria decision making. Appl Math Model 71:467–490

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen L, Wang YM, Huang Y (2020) Cross-efficiency aggregation method based on prospect consensus process. Ann Oper Res 288(1):115–135

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chen ZS, Zhang X, Rodríguez RM, Pedrycz W, Martínez L, Skibniewski MJ (2022) Expertise-structure and risk-appetite-integrated two-tiered collective opinion generation framework for large-scale group decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 30(12):5496–5510

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiao KP (2019) Multiple criteria decision making for linguistic judgments with importance quantifier guided ordered weighted averaging operator. Inf Sci 474:48–74

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Cook WD, Kress M (1999) Characterizing an equitable allocation of shared costs: a DEA approach1. Eur J Oper Res 119(3):652–661

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • De Miguel L, Paternain D, Lizasoain I, Ochoa G, Bustince H (2017) Some characterizations of lattice OWA operators. Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 25(Suppl. 1):5–17

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • D’Urso P, Chachi J (2022) OWA fuzzy regression. Int J Approx Reason 142:430–450

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • D’Urso P, Leski JM (2020) Fuzzy clustering of fuzzy data based on robust loss functions and ordered weighted averaging. Fuzzy Sets Syst 389:1–28

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Emrouznejad A, Amin GR (2010) Improving minimax disparity model to determine the OWA operator weights. Inf Sci 180(8):1477–1485

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Flores-Sosa M, Aviles-Ochoa E, Merigo JM (2020) Induced OWA operators in linear regression. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38(5):5509–5520

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores-Sosa M, Avilés-Ochoa E, Merigó JM, Kacprzyk J (2022) The OWA operator in multiple linear regression. Appl Soft Comput 124:108985

    Google Scholar 

  • Fu Y, Li M (2022) DEA cross-efficiency aggregation based on preference structure and acceptability analysis. Int Trans Oper Res 29(2):987–1011

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosal S, Jain A (2022) Weighted aspect based sentiment analysis using extended OWA operators and Word2Vec for tourism. Multimed Tools Appl 82:1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Green R, Doyle J (1996) Improving discernment in DEA using profiling: a comment. Omega 24:365–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan MM, Oukil A (2021) Design of efficient systems of commercial material handling equipment for supply chain and logistics facilities using DEA. Int J Logist Syst Manag 39(2):241–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin L (2023) Uncertain probability, regular probability interval and relative proximity. Fuzzy Sets Syst 467:108579

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Jin L, Mesiar R, Yager RR (2019) Ordered weighted averaging aggregation on convex poset. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 27(3):612–617

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin L, Mesiar R, Yager RR (2020) On WA expressions of Induced OWA operators and inducing function based orness with application in evaluation. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 29(6):1695–1700

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin L, Yager RR, Špirková J, Mesiar R, Paternain D, Bustince H (2021) OWA aggregation with dual preferences for basic uncertain information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 40(3):4535–4544

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin L, Chen ZS, Yager RR, Senapati T, Mesiar R, Zamora DG, Martínez L (2023a) Ordered weighted averaging operators for basic uncertain information granules. Inf Sci 645:119357

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin L, Chen ZS, Zhang JY, Yager RR, Mesiar R, Kalina M, Martínez L (2023b) Bi-polar preference based weights allocation with incomplete fuzzy relations. Inf Sci 621:308–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzyk J, Yager RR, Merigo JM (2019) Towards human-centric aggregation via ordered weighted aggregation operators and linguistic data summaries: a new perspective on Zadeh’s inspirations. IEEE Comput Intell Mag 14(1):16–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Kishor A, Singh AK, Sonam S, Pal NR (2019) A new family of OWA operators featuring constant orness. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 28(9):2263–2269

    Google Scholar 

  • León T, Ramón N, Ruiz JL, Sirvent I (2014) Using induced ordered weighted averaging (IOWA) operators for aggregation in cross-efficiency evaluations. Int J Intell Syst 29(12):1100–1116

    Google Scholar 

  • Leon-Castro E, Blanco-Mesa F, Hussain W, Flores-Sosa M, Perez-Arellano LA (2022) Tax revenue measurement using OWA operators. Cybern Syst. https://doi.org/10.1080/01969722.2022.2110687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li MJ, Lu JC, Chen L (2022) A method to determine the integrated weights of cross-efficiency aggregation. Soft Comput 26:1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X (2012) Models to determine parameterized ordered weighted averaging operators using optimization criteria. Inf Sci 190:27–55

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu P, Wang LF (2019) The use of principal component analysis for cross-efficiency aggregation. Eng Lett 27(3):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu H, Cai J, Martínez L (2013) The importance weighted continuous generalized ordered weighted averaging operator and its application to group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 48:24–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu HH, Song YY, Yang GL (2019a) Cross-efficiency evaluation in data envelopment analysis based on prospect theory. Eur J Oper Res 273(1):364–375

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Xu Y, Montes R, Dong Y, Herrera F (2019b) Analysis of self-confidence indices-based additive consistency for fuzzy preference relations with self-confidence and its application in group decision making. Int J Intell Syst 34(5):920–946

    Google Scholar 

  • Medina J, Yager RR (2021) OWA operators with functional weights. Fuzzy Sets Syst 414:38–56

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Merigó JM, Gil-Lafuente AM (2009) The induced generalized OWA operator. Inf Sci 179(6):729–741

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Merigó JM, Yager RR (2013) Norm aggregations and OWA operators. In: Bustince H, Fernandez J, Mesiar R, Calvo T. (eds) Aggregation functions in theory and in practise. Springer, Berlin, pp 141–151

  • Mesiar R, Stupňanová A, Yager RR (2015) Generalizations of OWA operators. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(6):2154–2162

    Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddas Z, Oukil A, Vaez-Ghasemi M (2022) Global multi-period performance evaluation—new model and productivity index. RAIRO Oper Res 56(3):1503–1521

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Noth T, Rinner C (2021) Prioritization in wildfire restoration using GIS-based ordered weighted averaging (OWA): a case study in southern California. AIMS Environ Sci 8(5):481–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Oral M, Oukil A, Malouin J-L, Kettani O (2014) The appreciative democratic voice of DEA: a case of faculty academic performance evaluation. Socio Econ Plann Sci 48:20–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Oral M, Amin GR, Oukil A (2015) Cross-efficiency in DEA: a maximum resonated appreciative model. Measurement 63:159–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A (2018) Ranking via composite weighting schemes under a DEA cross-evaluation framework. Comput Ind Eng 117:217–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A (2019) Embedding OWA under preference ranking for DEA cross-efficiency aggregation: issues and procedures. Int J Intell Syst 34(5):947–965

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A (2020a) Designing efficient material handling systems: a two-stage approach based on DEA cross-efficiency. 5th edition of the IEEE international conference on logistics operations management, GOL'20 ENSIAS, 28–30 October April 2020a, Rabat, Morocco

  • Oukil A (2020b) Exploiting value system multiplicity and preference voting for robust ranking. OMEGA Int J Manag Sci 94:102048

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A (2022) Selecting material handling technology through a market weight scheme based DEA approach. Int J Manag Sci Eng Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2022.2116122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Al-Zidi A (2018) Benchmarking the hotel industry in Oman through a three-stage DEA-based procedure. J Art Soc Sci 9(2):5–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Amin GR (2015) Maximum appreciative cross-efficiency in DEA: a new ranking method. Comput Ind Eng 81:14–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, El-Bouri A (2021) Ranking dispatching rules in multi-objective dynamic flow shop scheduling: a multi-faceted perspective. Int J Prod Res 59(2):388–411

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Govindaluri SM (2017) A systematic approach for ranking football players within an integrated DEA-OWA framework. Manag Decis Econ 38(8):1125–1136

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Govindaluri SM (2020) A hybrid multi-attribute decision making procedure for ranking project proposals: a historical data perspective. Manag Decis Econ 41(3):461–472

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Channouf N, Al-Zidi A (2016) Performance evaluation of the hotel industry in an emerging tourism destination: case of Oman. J Hosp Tour Manag 29:60–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Soltani AA, Boutaghane H, Abdalla O, Bermad A, Hasbaia M, Boulassel MR (2021) A Surrogate Water Quality Index to assess groundwater using a unified DEA-OWA framework. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:56658–56685

    Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, El-Bouri A, Emrouznejad A (2022a) Energy-aware job scheduling in a multi-objective production environment—an integrated DEA-OWA model. Comput Ind Eng 168:108065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108065

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oukil A, Soltani AA, Zeroual S, Boutaghane H, Abdalla O, Bermad A, Hasbaia M, Boulassel MR (2022b) A DEA Cross-efficiency inclusive methodology for assessing water quality: a Composite Water Quality Index. J Hydrol 612(Part A):128123

    Google Scholar 

  • Pang J, Liu X, Huang Q (2020) A new quality evaluation system of soil and water conservation for sustainable agricultural development. Agric Water Manag 240:106235

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabbaghian RJ, Zarghami M, Nejadhashemi AP, Sharifi MB, Herman MR, Daneshvar F (2016) Application of risk-based multiple criteria decision analysis for selection of the best agricultural scenario for effective watershed management. J Environ Manag 168:260–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeidi RG, Oukil A, Amin GR, Raissi S (2015) Prioritization of textile fabric defects using ordered weighted averaging operator. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 76(5):745–752

    Google Scholar 

  • Sexton TR, Silkman RH, Hogan AJ (1986) Data envelopment analysis: critique and extensions. In: Silkman RH (ed) Measuring efficiency: an assessment of data envelopment analysis. Jossey Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Shang J, Sueyoshi T (1995) A unified framework for the selection of a flexible manufacturing system. Eur J Oper Res 85(2):297–315

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman HD, Gold F (1985) Bank branch operating efficiency: evaluation with DEA. J Bank Finance 9:297–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Siminski K (2017) Fuzzy weighted C-ordered means clustering algorithm. Fuzzy Sets Syst 318:1–33

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Soltani AA, Oukil A, Boutaghane H, Bermad A, Boulassel MR (2021) A new methodology for assessing water quality, based on data envelopment analysis: application to Algerian dams. Ecol Indic 121:106952

    Google Scholar 

  • Song L, Liu F (2018) An improvement in DEA cross-efficiency aggregation based on the Shannon entropy. Int Trans Oper Res 25(2):705–714

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sow O, Oukil A, Ndiaye BM, Marcos A (2016) Efficiency analysis of public transportation subunits using DEA and Bootstrap approaches—Dakar Dem Dikk case study. J Math Res 8(6):114–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Tofallis C (1996) Improving discernment in DEA using profiling. Omega 24(3):361–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres-Martínez A, Gil-Lafuente AM, Merigó JM (2018) The OWA operator with boxplot method in time series. In: Ferrer-Comalat, J., Linares-Mustarós S, Merig, J, Kacprzyk J. (eds) International conference on modelling and simulation in management sciences. Springer, Cham, pp 13–21

  • Vigier HP, Scherger V, Terceño A (2017) An application of OWA operators in fuzzy business diagnosis. Appl Soft Comput 54:440–448

    Google Scholar 

  • Vizuete-Luciano E, Boria-Reverter S, Merigó-Lindahl JM, Gil-Lafuente AM, Solé-Moro ML (2021) Fuzzy branch-and-bound algorithm with OWA operators in the case of consumer decision making. Mathematics 9(23):3045

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang YM, Chin KS (2011) The use of OWA operator weights for cross-efficiency aggregation. Omega 39(5):493–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang YM, Parkan C (2005) A minimax disparity approach for obtaining OWA operator weights. Inf Sci 175(1–2):20–29

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wei C, Pei Z, Li H (2012) An induced OWA operator in coal mine safety evaluation. J Comput Syst Sci 78(4):997–1005

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Liang L, Zha YC (2008) Determination of the weights of ultimate cross efficiency based on the solution of nucleolus in cooperative game. Syst Eng Theory Pract 28(5):92–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Liang L, Yang F (2009) Determination of the weights for the ultimate cross efficiency using Shapley value in cooperative game. Expert Syst Appl 36(1):872–876

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Sun J, Liang L, Zha Y (2011) Determination of weights for ultimate cross efficiency using Shannon entropy. Expert Syst Appl 38(5):5162–5165

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decisionmaking. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18(1):183–190

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2003) Induced aggregation operators. Fuzzy Sets Syst 137(1):59–69

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2004) Generalized OWA aggregation operators. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 3(1):93–107

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2006) Generalizing variance to allow the inclusion of decision attitude in decision making under uncertainty. Int J Approx Reason 42(3):137–158

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2017) OWA aggregation of multi-criteria with mixed uncertain satisfactions. Inf Sci 417:88–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (2019) OWA aggregation with an uncertainty over the arguments. Inf Fusion 52:206–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR, Filev DP (1999) Induced ordered weighted averaging operators. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (cybernetics) 29(2):141–150

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR, Kacprzyk J (2012) The ordered weighted averaging operators: theory and applications. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR, Kacprzyk J, Beliakov G (2011) Recent developments in the ordered weighted averaging operators: theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang GL, Yang JB, Liu WB, Li XX (2013) Cross-efficiency aggregation in DEA models using the evidential-reasoning approach. Eur J Oper Res 231(2):393–404

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Yari G, Chaji A (2012) Determination of ordered weighted averaging operator weights based on the M-entropy measures. Int J Intell Syst 27(12):1020–1033

    Google Scholar 

  • Yi P, Li W (2019) Induced cluster-based OWA operators with reliability measures and the application in group decision-making. Int J Intell Syst 34(4):527–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Zavadskas EK, Antucheviciene J, Chatterjee P (2018) Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques for business processes information management. Information 10(1):4

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Xia Q, Yang F, Song S, Ang S (2021) Interval cross-efficiency for ranking decision making units using the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis-evidential reasoning approach. Comput Ind Eng 156:107222

    Google Scholar 

  • Zou T, He F, Cai M, Li Y (2018) Methods for describing different results obtained from different methods in accident reconstruction. Forensic Sci Int 291:253–259

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman

    Amar Oukil

  2. University of New Brunswick, Saint John, Canada

    Gholam R. Amin

Authors
  1. Amar Oukil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gholam R. Amin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amar Oukil.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18.

Table 14 Data set of 10 Chinese universities (Liu et al. 2019a, b)
Full size table
Table 15 Data set of 12 manufacturing systems (Shang and Sueyoshi 1995)
Full size table
Table 16 Data set of 14 bank branches (Sherman and Gold 1985)
Full size table
Table 17 Data set of 14 airlines (Tofallis 1996)
Full size table
Table 18 Data set of 12 DMUs (Cook and Kress 1999))
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oukil, A., Amin, G.R. An induced OWA aggregation operator with dual preference setting for DEA cross-efficiency ranking. Soft Comput 27, 18419–18440 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09235-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-023-09235-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation