Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ﻋﺒﺪﺍﷲ ﺳﻠﻴﻤﺎﻥ ﺍﻟﻌﺰﺍﺯ
ﺍﳌﺴﺘﺨﻠﺺ
ﺍﳌﻘﺪﻣﺔ- ١
squire, 1989
Muralidhar
and Rich (1991), Santhanam and Schniederjans (1993), Liberatorate and Stylianou (1994), Mukherjee (1994)
et al. (1988), bard and Kaufmann (1988), Muralidhar et al. (1990), Ringuest and Graves (1996), Schniederjans
Industrial Programming Study and
ﳕﻮﺫﺝ ﺑﺮﳎﺔ ﺍﻷﻫﺪﺍﻑ ﺍﻟﺜﻨﺎﺋﻴﺔ.٢
ﶈﺔ ﻣﻮﺟﺰﺓ ﻋﻦ ﺃﺳﻠﻮﺏ ﺑﺮﳎﺔ ﺍﻷﻫﺪﺍﻑ:ﺃﻭﻻ
ﺍﻟﺼﻴﺎﻏﺔ ﺍﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﳌﺸﻜﻠﺔ ﺍﺧﺘﻴﺎﺭ ﺍﳌﺸﺮﻭﻋﺎﺕ ﰲ ﺩﺭﺍﺳﺔ ﻣﺎ ﻗﺒﻞ ﺍﳉﺪﻭﻯ:ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺎﹰ
xj
Minimize Z = ∑ i=1 Pk(di-+ di+ )
m
subject to : :
∑ CijXj + di -di = bi
- +
∑ nj=1 Xj = α
and
Xj = 1
Xj = 0
di-,di+ > 0
k = 1,2,3,..., K i = 1,2,3,...,m j = 1,2,3,...,n
Z
Pk
bidi-
bidi+
biCij
biXj
jXj
bi
α
ﻃﺮﻳﻘﺔ ﺣﻞ ﺍﻟﻨﻤﻮﺫﺝ:ﺛﺎﻟﺜﺎ
(Lee and Morris, 1977) Implicite
Schniederjans and Fowler (1989)
ﻗﻴﺪ ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﺗﺸﻐﻴﻞ ﺍﻟﻌﻤﺎﻟﺔ-٢
110.000X1 + 140.000X2 + 90.000X3 + 170.000X4 + 240.000X5 + 150.000X6 +
300.000X7 + 250.000X8 + 120.000X9 + 130.000X10 + 95.000X11 + 150.000X12 +
180.000X13 + 145.000X14 + 100.000X15 + 70.000X16 + 152.000X17 + 300.000X18 + d2- -
d2+ = 1,700.000
X18 X17X16X15X14X13X12X11X10 X9 X8 X7 X6 X5 X4 X3 X2 X1
250 21 11.8 5 9.8 6.7 19.717.3 16 6.8 16 22 15.87.8 13 18.6 5.9 1.5 8.9
1700 300 52 70 100 145 180 150 120 95 120250 300150240 170 90 140 110
500 60 65 20 80 67 80 35 15 45 15 32 22 14 11 30 70 10 5
500 90 60 85 20 15 0 0 15 10 15 30 0 5 10 36 40 30 20
250 20 40 60 18 13 115 2 5 2 5 16 11 7 19 17 24 12 18
180 0 0 13 0 0 80 45 0 12 0 18 7 5 21 0 15 30 0
100 0 0 3 0 0 3 5 0 2 0 3 2 1 6 0 2 4 0
50 0 0 0 70 10 20 30 10 40 10 0 0 5 10 0 8 0 0
10 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 3 4 5 3 2 1 5 4 2
50 3 5 1 1 2 3 4 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 5 3 4 4
50 2 5 2 2 3 1 2 3 2 3 4 3 5 5 1 2 3 3
500 60 70 85 95 100 100 85 55 85 55 70 65 100 75 80 90 100 95
50 1 2 1 1 2 2 3 5 3 5 3 1 1 4 2 3 5 4
1500 480 310 95 190 120 500 354 180 310180270 124130160 150 125 170 110
5151
Schniederjans and Fowler, 1990, P.341
ﻣﻌﻴﺎﺭ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﺍﻟﺘﺼﻨﻴﻊ ﺍﶈﻠﻲ ﻵﻻﺕ ﻭﻣﻌﺪﺍﺕ ﺍﳌﺸﺮﻭﻉ-٤
20X1 + 30X2 + 40X3 + 36X4 + 10X5 + 5X6 + 0X7 + 30X8 + 15X9 + 70X10 + 10X11 +
0X12 + 0X13 + 15X14 + 20X15 + 85X16 + 60X17 + 90X18 + d4- - d4+ = 500
ﺍﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻭﺍﳌﻨﺎﻗﺸﺔ- ٤
PK2
Pk2α
α=10 α=10 α=9 α=8 α=7 α=6 α=5 α=4 α=3 α=2 α=1 Xj
4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 X1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 X2
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X3
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X4
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 X5
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X6
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X7
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X8
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 X9
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X10
6 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 X11
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 X12
10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X13
8 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X14
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X15
9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X16
7 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 X17
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X18
Xj
Xj
pk3 pk2 pk1
1:x17 P1 1:x2 P1 1:x8 P1
2:x6 P2 2:x9 P2 2:x18 P2
3:x5 P3 3:x5 P3 3:x13 P3
4:x2 P4 4:x1 P4 4:x4 P4
5:x1 P5 5:x12 P5 5:x12 P5
6:x14 P6 6:x11 P6 6:x9 P6
7:x11 P7 7:x17 P7 7:x17 P7
8:x15 P8 8:x14 P8 8:x2 P8
9:x15 P9 9:x16 P9 9:x15 P9
10:x12 P10 10:x13 P10 10:x11 P10
P11 P11 P11
P12 P12 P12
P13 P13 P13
P14 P14 P14
Pk1
Pk3, Pk2
Pk2
0.85 0.900.95 1.0
0.600.65 0.700.750.80
0.40 0.45 0.560.55
0.35
α
29 50 21 33 50 17
182 250 68 171 250 73
85 100 15 79 100 21
424 500 76 334 500 166
425 500 75 430 500 70
183.3 250 66.7 416.5 250 83.5
35 50 15 36 50 14
35 50 15 36 50 14
84 180 96 +14 180 194
940 1700 760 740 1700 960
80 500 420 60 500 440
00 50 50 +10 50 60
+2 10 12 +2 10 12
526 1500 974 46 1500 1454
1: X13, 2: X12, 3: X5, 4: X2, 5: X8
1: X2, 2: X9, 3: X5, 4: X1, 5: X12
ﺍﳋﻼﺻﺔ
ﺷﻜﺮ ﻭﻋﺮﻓﺎﻥ
ﺍﳌﺮﺍﺟﻊ
ﺍﳌﺮﺍﺟﻊ ﺍﻟﻌﺮﺑﻴﺔ: ﺃﻭﻻ
ﳏﻤﺪ،ﺍﳊﻨﺎﻭﻱ
ﺻﺒﺤﻲ،ﻃﻪ
ﲰﲑ ﳏﻤﺪ،ﻋﺒﺪﺍﻟﻌﺰﻳﺰ
ﻛﻤـﺎﻝ ﺃﲪـﺪ،ﻋﺴﻜﺮ
ﺍﳌﺮﺍﺟﻊ ﺍﻷﺟﻨﺒﻴﺔ: ﺛﺎﻧﻴﺎ
Bard, J. F., Balachandra, R. and Kaufmann, P. E., Interactive Approach to R&D Project
Selection and Termination, IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management, Vol. 35, No.
3, August 1988, pp. 139-146.
Benjamin, C.O., A Linear Goal-Programming Model for Public-Sector Project Selection. Opl.
Res. Soc., Vol. 36, No. 1, (1985), pp.13-23.
Bitran, G. R., Theory and algorithm for linear multiple objective programs with zero-one
variables. Mathematical Programming, 17, (1979), pp.362-390.
Charnes, A. and Cooper, W. W., Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear
Programming. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1961.
Hawkins, C. A. and Adams, R. A., A goal programming model for capital budgeting, Financial
Management. 3, (1974), pp. 52-57.
Ignizio, J. P., Goal Programming and Extension. Health. Lexington, MA. 1976.
Ijiri, Y., Programming Goals and Accounting for Controls. Amsterdam: North Holland. 1965.
industirial Programming Study and Project Identification in Jourdan, Dar AI-Handasah.
Jordan. 1981.
Joiner, C. and Drake, A. E., Government Planning and Budgeting with multiple objective
models. Omega. 11, (1983), pp. 57-66.
Lee, S. M., Goal Programming for Decision Analysis, Philadelphia: Auerbach, 1972.
Lee, S. M. and Lerro, A. J., Capital budgeting for multiple adjectives. Financial Management. 3,
(1974). pp. 58-66.
Lee, S. M. and Morris, R. L., Integer Goal Programming Methods, TIMS Studies in the
Management Sciences, 6(1977), pp. 273-289.
Lee, Sang M. and Shim, Jung P., Micro Management Science: Microcomputer Applications of
Management Science. Needham Heights. Massachusetts, Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1990.
Leinbach, T. R. and Cromley, R. G., A goal programming approach to public investment decisions: a
case study of rural roads in Indonesia, Soc.-Econ. Plann. Sci., 17, (1983), pp. 1-10.
Liberatore, M. J., and Stylianou, Anthony C., Using knowledge-based systems for strategic
market assessment. information & Management. 27, (1994), pp. 221-232.
Mukherjee, K., Application of an interactive method for MOILP in project selection decision - A
case from Indian coal mining industry. International Journal of Production Economics. 36,
(1994), pp. 203-211.
Muralidhar, K., Santhanam, R. and Schniederjans, M. J., An Optimization Model for
Information System Project Selection. Management Science and Policy Analysis. Vol. 6,
No. 1, (1988). pp. 53-62.
Muralidhar, K., Santhanam, R. and Wilson, R. L., Using the Analytic Hierarchy for Information
System Project Selection. Information and Management, January 1990. pp. 1-9.
Ringuest, J. L. and Graves, Samuel B., The Linear R & D Project Selection Problem: An
Alternative to Net Present Value. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol.
37, No. 2. May 1990. pp. 143-146.
Santhanam, R., Murlidhar, K. and Schniederjans, M. J., A Zero-One Goal Programming
Approach for Information System Project Selection. Omega. Vol. 17, No. 6, (1989), pp.
583-594.
Santhanam, R. and Schniederjans, M. J., A Model Formulation System for Information System
Project Selection. Computers Operations Research. Vol. 20, No.7, (1993), pp. 755-767.
Schniederjans, M. J. and Wilson, Rick L., Using the analytic hierarchy process and goal
programming for information system project selection. lnformation & Management, 20
(1991), pp. 333-342.
Schniederjans, M. S. and Santhanam, Badhika, A multi-objective constrained resource
information system project selection method. European Journal of Operational Research.
Vol. 70, (1993), pp. 244-253.
Schiederjans, M. J., Linear Goal Programming. Petrocelli Books. Princeton. N. J., 1984.
Schiederjans, M. J. and Fowler, K. L., Strategic Acquisition Management: A Multi-objective
Synergistic Approach. J. Opl. Res. Soc., Vol. 40, No. 4, (1989), pp. 333-345.
Squire, L. and Herman G. Van dev Tak, Economic Analysis of Projects. The Johns Hopkins
University Press, Baltimore. Maryland. USA. 1989.
Taylor, B. W., Moore, L. J. and Clayton, E. R., R & D project selection and manpower allocation with
integer nonlinear goal programming. Management Science, Vol. 28, (1982), pp. 1149-1158.
Younis, Sfeir A. and Bromley, D. W., Decision-making in Developing Countries. Praeger. New
York (1977).
ABSTRACT. This paper presents a generalized model for selecting projects at the pre
feasibility stage using a linear zero-one goal programming technique and demonstrates
its application using a case example. The case example involves multiple social,
environmental, and economic criteria that are used for selecting candidate projects to be
considered at the feasibility study stage of the project selection process. The decision
maker's preferences on the project portfolio considered is demonstrated through varying
the priority structure and the number of projects to be selected. The model is solved by
the branch and bound procedure. The model is shown to be an adequate available
decision making tool to support planners in developing countries.