A new approach for ranking efficient DMUs in Data Envelopment Analysis by using cooperative game theory

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Faculty of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran

2 Faculty of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, Semnan University, Semnan. Iran

Abstract

Ranking of decision making units (DMU) is an important issue in data envelopment analysis (DEA). When efficient DMUs have the same efficiency scores, traditional DEA models usually fail to rank efficient DMUs. In recent years, cooperative game theory has been used to compare and improve the discrimination power of efficient DMUs. In this research, a new method of cooperative game is proposed. The idea of this method is that first, by removing a certain subset of efficientِDMUs from the set of units, the efficiency of all units is calculated, and then, using the Shepley value in cooperative game theory, the efficient units are ranked. A numerical example is presented to show the performance of the proposed method and its comparison with recent ranking methods. In the empirical study, the ranking of efficient DMUs is useful and reasonable.

Keywords

Main Subjects


[1] Andersen, P. and Petersen, N.C., 1993. A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 39(10), pp.1261-1264. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.39.10.1261
[2] Banker, R.D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W., 1984. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), pp.1078-1092. doi:
10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078
[3] Cao, L., Ma, Z. and Muren, 2020. Cooperation and competition strategy analysis of decision-making units based on efficiency game. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 29, pp.235-248.doi: 10.1007/s11518-019-5417-9
[4] Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. and Rhodes, E., 1979. Measuring the efficiency of decision-making units.European journal of operational research, 3(4), p.339. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(79)90229-7
[5] Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Golany, B., Seiford, L. and Stutz, J., 1985. Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. Journal of econometrics,30(1-2), pp.91-107. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(85)90133-2
[6] Chen, Y., 2004. Ranking efficient units in DEA. Omega, 32(3), pp.213-219. doi:
10.1016/j.omega.2003.11.001
[7] Chen, Y., 2005. Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility. European journal of operational research, 161(2), pp.545-551. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2003.08.060
[8] Davtalab-Olyaie, M., Ghandi, F. and Asgharian, M., 2021. On the spectrum of achievable targets in cross-efficiency evaluation and the associated secondary goal models. Expert Systems with Applications, 177, p.114927. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.114927
[9] Doyle, J. and Green, R., 1994. Efficiency and cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, meanings and
uses. Journal of the operational research society, 45, pp.567-578. doi: 10.1057/jors.1994.84
[10] Du, J., Liang, L., Yang, F., Bi, G.B. and Yu, X.B., 2010. A new DEA‐based method for fully ranking
all decision‐making units. Expert Systems, 27(5), pp.363-373. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0394.2010.00553.x
[11] Ekiz, M.K. and Tuncer Şakar, C., 2020. A new DEA approach to fully rank DMUs with an application to MBA programs. International Transactions in Operational Research, 27(4), pp.1886-1910. doi:10.1111/itor.12635
[12] Ghiyasi, M., 2019. Full ranking of efficient and inefficient DMUs with the same measure of efficiency in DEA. International Journal of Business Performance and Supply Chain Modelling, 10(3), pp.236-252. doi: 10.1504/IJBPSCM.2019.100848
[13] Hinojosa, M.A., Lozano, S., Borrero, D.V. and Mármol, A.M., 2017. Ranking efficient DMUs using cooperative game theory. Expert Systems with Applications, 80, pp.273-283. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.03.004
[14] Izadikhah, M. and Farzipoor Saen, R., 2015. A new data envelopment analysis method for ranking decision making units: an application in industrial parks. Expert Systems, 32(5), pp.596-608. doi:10.1111/exsy.12112
[15] Jahanshahloo, G.R., Junior, H.V., Lotfi, F.H. and Akbarian, D., 2007. A new DEA ranking system
based on changing the reference set. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(1), pp.331-337.doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.06.012
[16] Kiaei, H. and Nasseri, S.H., 2018. Allocation of Weights Using Simultaneous Optimization of Inputs and Outputs’ Contribution in Cross-efficiency Evaluation of DEA. Yugoslav Journal of Operations Research, 28(4), pp.521-538. doi: 10.2298/YJOR1710
[17] Li, Y., Xie, J., Wang, M. and Liang, L., 2016. Super efficiency evaluation using a common platform on a cooperative game. European Journal of Operational Research, 255(3), pp.884-892. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2016.06.001
[18] Lozano, S., Hinojosa, M.A. and Mármol, A.M., 2019. Extending the bargaining approach to DEA target setting. Omega, 85, pp.94-102. doi: /10.1016/j.omega.2018.05.015
[19] Lovell, C.K. and Rouse, A.P.B., 2003. Equivalent standard DEA models to provide superefficiency scores. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54(1), pp.101-108. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601483
[20] Ma, X., Liu, Y., Wei, X., Li, Y., Zheng, M., Li, Y., Cheng, C., Wu, Y., Liu, Z. and Yu, Y., 2017. Measurement and decomposition of energy efficiency of Northeast China—based on super efficiency DEA model and Malmquist index. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24, pp.19859-19873. doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9441-3
[21] Mahmoudi, R. and Emrouznejad, A., 2023. A multi-period performance analysis of airlines: A gameSBM-NDEA and Malmquist Index approach. Research in Transportation Business Management, 46,p.100801. doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2022.100801
[22] Örkcü, M., Özsoy, V.S. and Örkcü, H.H., 2020. An optimistic-pessimistic DEA model based on game cross efficiency approach.RAIRO-Operations Research, 54(4), pp.1215-1230. doi:
10.1051/ro/2019052
[23] Sexton, T.R., Silkman, R.H. and Hogan, A.J., 1986. Data envelopment analysis: Critique and extensions. New directions for program evaluation, 1986(32), pp.73-105. doi: 10.1002/ev.1441
[24] Ramón, N., Ruiz, J.L. and Sirvent, I., 2020. Cross-benchmarking for performance evaluation: Looking across best practices of different peer groups using DEA. Omega, 92, p.102169. doi:
10.1016/j.omega.2019.102169
[25] Tone, K., 2001. A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European journal of operational research, 130(3), pp.498-509. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00407-5
[26] Wang, M., Li, L., Dai, Q. and Shi, F., 2021. Resource allocation based on DEA and non- cooperative game. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity, 34(6), pp.2231-2249. doi: 10.1007/s11424-021-0259-1
[27] Wen, Y., An, Q., Hu, J. and Chen, X., 2022. DEA game for internal cooperation between an upperlevel process and multiple lower-level processes. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 73(9), pp.1949-1960. doi: 10.1080/01605682.2021.1967212
[28] Wu, J., Liang, L., Yang, F. and Yan, H., 2009. Bargaining game model in the evaluation of decision making units. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), pp.4357-4362. doi:
10.1016/j.eswa.2008.05.001
[29] Xie, Q., Zhang, L.L., Shang, H., Emrouznejad, A. and Li, Y., 2021. Evaluating performance of superefficiency models in ranking efficient decision-making units based on Monte Carlo simulations. Annals of Operations Research, 305, pp.273-323. doi: 10.1007/s10479-021-04148-3
[30] Sojoodi, S., Dastmalchi, L. and Neshat, H., 2021. Efficiency ranking of different types of power plants in Iran using super efficiency method. Energy, 233, p.121104. doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.121104
[31] Zhu, Q., Song, M. and Wu, J., 2020. Extended secondary goal approach for common equilibrium efficient frontier selection in DEA with fixed-sum outputs. Computers Industrial Engineering, 144,p.106483. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2020.106483