Skip to main content
Top

2021 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

16. Stochastic Multi-criteria Decision Analysis of Combat Simulation Data for Selecting the Best Land Combat Vehicle Option

Authors : Thang Cao, Dion Grieger

Published in: Data and Decision Sciences in Action 2

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Land Combat Vehicles (LCVs) are a critical fighting capability of the Australian Army. The operational effectiveness of a LCV is usually modelled via combat simulation in which the multi-criteria metrics are measured from the simulation output. Consequently, it is important to develop a multi-criteria decision-making procedure to support upcoming acquisition decisions for future vehicle options. Criteria measurements in combat simulation and decision-makers’ preference often involve uncertainties; however, option ranking and selection procedures from simulations are normally limited to a single response metric or deterministic preference for the multiple metrics in the current literature. In this paper, we address these uncertainties by using a probability distribution function and Monte Carlo simulation in the stochastic multi-criteria acceptability analysis (SMAA) model for aiding this decision-making problem. Additionally, all uncertain preference information from DMs are represented as feasible weight space (FWS) and are used in combination with other weighting techniques such as analytical hierarchy process (AHP). The aim of this paper is to describe the application of SMAA, FWS and AHP to the results generated in a close-loop combat simulation, such that the options with uncertain data can be evaluated and analyzed, and the best option can be selected for a specific task or scenario. To the best of our knowledge, this combined approach has been applied for the first time to deal with the defence decision analysis problems with uncertainty and interdependency.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literature
1.
go back to reference Aull-Hyde R, Erdogan S, Duke J (2006) An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP. Eur J Oper Res 171(1):290–295MathSciNetCrossRef Aull-Hyde R, Erdogan S, Duke J (2006) An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP. Eur J Oper Res 171(1):290–295MathSciNetCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) An integrated approach multiple criteria decision Analysis. Springer Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) An integrated approach multiple criteria decision Analysis. Springer
3.
go back to reference Balogh I, Harless G (2003) An overview of the COMBAT XXI simulation model: a model for the analysis of land and amphibious warfare. In: Proceedings of 71st military operations research society symposium Balogh I, Harless G (2003) An overview of the COMBAT XXI simulation model: a model for the analysis of land and amphibious warfare. In: Proceedings of 71st military operations research society symposium
4.
go back to reference Brans JP, Mareschal B, Vincke Ph (1984) PROMETHEE: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. In: Brans JP (ed) Operational Research, IFORS 84. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 477–490 Brans JP, Mareschal B, Vincke Ph (1984) PROMETHEE: a new family of outranking methods in multicriteria analysis. In: Brans JP (ed) Operational Research, IFORS 84. North Holland, Amsterdam, pp 477–490
5.
go back to reference Cao T, Coutts A, Pietsch B (2010) Multi-attributes utility theory and statistical analysis for defence future vehicle options. ASOR Bull 29(2):69–81 Cao T, Coutts A, Pietsch B (2010) Multi-attributes utility theory and statistical analysis for defence future vehicle options. ASOR Bull 29(2):69–81
6.
go back to reference Emond EJ (2006) Developments in the analysis of rankings in operational research. DRDC CORA TR 2006-37 Emond EJ (2006) Developments in the analysis of rankings in operational research. DRDC CORA TR 2006-37
7.
go back to reference Edwards W, Baron HF (1994) SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multi-attribute utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 60:306–325 Edwards W, Baron HF (1994) SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multi-attribute utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 60:306–325
8.
go back to reference Goepel KD (2013) Implementing the analytic hierarchy process as a standard method for multi-criteria decision making in corporate enterprises—a new AHP excel template with multiple inputs. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process, Kuala Lumpur Goepel KD (2013) Implementing the analytic hierarchy process as a standard method for multi-criteria decision making in corporate enterprises—a new AHP excel template with multiple inputs. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on the analytic hierarchy process, Kuala Lumpur
10.
go back to reference Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, Preference and Value Tradeoffs Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1993) Decisions with multiple objectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, Preference and Value Tradeoffs
11.
go back to reference Lahdelma R, Hokkanen J, Salminen P (1998) SMAA-stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 106:137–143 Lahdelma R, Hokkanen J, Salminen P (1998) SMAA-stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 106:137–143
12.
go back to reference Lahdelma R, Salminen P (2001) SMAA-2: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper Res 3:444–454 Lahdelma R, Salminen P (2001) SMAA-2: Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for group decision making. Oper Res 3:444–454
13.
go back to reference Lahdelma R, Makkonen S, Salminenc P (2009) Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems. Omega 37(1):79–92CrossRef Lahdelma R, Makkonen S, Salminenc P (2009) Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems. Omega 37(1):79–92CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nelson BL, Swann J, Goldsman D, Song W (2001) Simple procedures for selecting the best simulated system when the number of alternatives is large. Oper Res 49(6):950–963CrossRef Nelson BL, Swann J, Goldsman D, Song W (2001) Simple procedures for selecting the best simulated system when the number of alternatives is large. Oper Res 49(6):950–963CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Nguyen M-T, Cao T (2017) A hybrid decision making model for evaluating land combat vehicle system. In: Syme G, Hatton MacDonald D, Fulton B, Piantadosi J (eds) 22nd International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, MODSIM2017, pp 1399–1405 Nguyen M-T, Cao T (2017) A hybrid decision making model for evaluating land combat vehicle system. In: Syme G, Hatton MacDonald D, Fulton B, Piantadosi J (eds) 22nd International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, MODSIM2017, pp 1399–1405
16.
go back to reference Roy B (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands Roy B (1996) Multicriteria methodology for decision aiding. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
17.
go back to reference Saaty TL (1982) Decision making for leaders. Wadsworth Inc, California Saaty TL (1982) Decision making for leaders. Wadsworth Inc, California
18.
go back to reference Schoemaker PJ, Waid CC (1982) An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive value models. Manag Sci 28(2):182–196CrossRef Schoemaker PJ, Waid CC (1982) An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive value models. Manag Sci 28(2):182–196CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Tervonen T, Lahdelma R (2007) Implementing stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 178:500–513 Tervonen T, Lahdelma R (2007) Implementing stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Eur J Oper Res 178:500–513
20.
go back to reference Wang H, Jiao W, Lahdelma R, Chuanzhi Z, Zou P Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for evaluation of combined heat and power units. Energies 8(1):59–78 (2015) Wang H, Jiao W, Lahdelma R, Chuanzhi Z, Zou P Stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis for evaluation of combined heat and power units. Energies 8(1):59–78 (2015)
Metadata
Title
Stochastic Multi-criteria Decision Analysis of Combat Simulation Data for Selecting the Best Land Combat Vehicle Option
Authors
Thang Cao
Dion Grieger
Copyright Year
2021
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60135-5_16