4.6 Article

Computing multiperiod efficiency using dominance networks

期刊

ANNALS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH
卷 309, 期 1, 页码 37-57

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10479-021-04421-5

关键词

Dominance relationships; Complex network analysis; Multiperiod data; Efficiency; Productivity change

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science
  2. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [DPI2017-85343-P]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper extends the DN analysis method to input and output data involving multiple time periods. The proposed TDN includes OUs from each time period and is visualized using various filters and node layouts. Network metrics are used to evaluate the efficiency of OUs in different periods and the corresponding productivity change.
Dominance Network (DN) analysis has been proposed to assess the efficiency of a set of operating units (OUs) that consume inputs to produce outputs. In a DN, the nodes represent OUs and the arcs correspond to dominance relationships (DR) between them. So far, this analysis has been applied in static scenarios where the OUs belong to the same time period. In this paper, the methodology is extended to the case in which the input and output data refer to multiple time periods tracking the performance evolution of each OU. The proposed Temporal Dominance Network (TDN) contains a node for each OU in each time period. TDN is a weighted directed acyclic graph. There exist contemporaneous DR (between nodes that correspond to the same time period) as well as non-contemporaneous DR (between nodes that correspond to different time periods). The union of these two types of DR defines the TDN. All these DR are transitive, which allows us to represent the TDN by its corresponding skeleton. Various filters and node layouts that can be used to help visualise the TDN are proposed. In addition, a number of network metrics are used to characterise the efficiency of the various OUs in the different periods as well as the corresponding productivity change between any two periods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据