By Topic

Multicriteria methods for resource planning: an experimental comparison

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
Hobbs, B.F. ; Dept. of Syst. Eng., Case Western Reserve Univ., Cleveland, OH, USA ; Meier, P.M.

Multicriteria decision making (MCDM) methods are widely used for comparing alternatives when there are multiple objectives. For instance, utilities use them for resource bidding, externality quantification, facility siting, and resource planning. There are many alternative methods, differing in their ease of use, validity, results, and appropriateness to resource planning. Several MCDM methods are compared in an experiment involving the choice of resource portfolio for Seattle City Light. Planners and interest group representatives applied direct weight assessment, tradeoff weight assessment, additive value functions, and goal programming. Most of the participants concluded that MCDM methods could promote insight and confidence in decision making. However, the authors also confirmed the existence of method biases previously identified by psychologists. No single method emerged as best. Thus, application of two or more methods as consistency checks is recommended to guard against bias, and to stimulate insight

Published in:

Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:9 ,  Issue: 4 )