# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
A note on optimization modelling of piecewise linear delay costing in the airline industry
• JIMO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
Adaptive large neighborhood search Algorithm for route planning of freight buses with pickup and delivery
July  2021, 17(4): 1795-1807. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020046

## Network data envelopment analysis with fuzzy non-discretionary factors

 1 Department of International Business, Kao Yuan University, Kaohsiung, 82151, Taiwan 2 Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, 84001, Taiwan 3 Department of Applied Mathematics, Tunghai University, Taichung 40704, Taiwan 4 Department of Applied Mathematics, National Chiayi University, Chiayi, 60004, Taiwan

* Corresponding author: C.-F. Hu

Received  January 2019 Revised  September 2019 Published  March 2020

Network data envelopment analysis (DEA) concerns using the DEA technique to measure the relative efficiency of a system, taking into account its internal structure. The results are more meaningful and informative than those obtained from the conventional DEA models. This work proposed a new network DEA model based on the fuzzy concept even though the inputs and outputs data are crisp numbers. The model is then extended to investigate the network DEA with fuzzy non-discretionary variables. An illustrative application assessing the impact of information technology (IT) on firm performance is included. The results reveal that modeling the IT budget as a fuzzy non-discretionary factor improves the system performance of firms in a banking industry.

Citation: Cheng-Kai Hu, Fung-Bao Liu, Hong-Ming Chen, Cheng-Feng Hu. Network data envelopment analysis with fuzzy non-discretionary factors. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1795-1807. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020046
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
]">Figure 1.  General network systems [12]
]">Figure 2.  Network system discussed in [18]
Data set for assessing IT impact on firm performance
 DMU j IT Fixed No. of Deposits Profit Fraction $\rm {budget}$ ${\mbox{assets}}$ ${\mbox{employees }}$ of loans $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ ${\mbox{recovered}}$ $X_1$ $X_2$ $X_3$ $Z$ $Y_1$ $Y_2$ 1 $0.150$ $0.713$ $13.3$ $14.478$ $0.232$ $0.986$ 2 $0.170$ $1.071$ $16.9$ $19.502$ $0.340$ $0.986$ 3 $0.235$ $1.224$ $24.0$ $20.952$ $0.363$ $0.986$ 4 $0.211$ $0.363$ $15.6$ $13.902$ $0.211$ $0.982$ 5 $0.133$ $0.409$ $18.485$ $15.206$ $0.237$ $0.984$ 6 $0.497$ $5.846$ $56.42$ $81.186$ $1.103$ $0.955$ 7 $0.060$ $0.918$ $56.42$ $81.186$ $1.103$ $0.986$ 8 $0.071$ $1.235$ $12.0$ $11.441$ $0.199$ $0.985$ 9 $1.500$ $18.120$ $89.51$ $124.072$ $1.858$ $0.972$ 10 $0.120$ $1.821$ $19.8$ $17.425$ $0.274$ $0.983$ 11 $0.120$ $1.915$ $19.8$ $17.425$ $0.274$ $0.983$ 12 $0.050$ $0.874$ $13.1$ $14.342$ $0.177$ $0.985$ 13 $0.370$ $6.918$ $12.5$ $32.491$ $0.648$ $0.945$ 14 $0.440$ $4.432$ $41.9$ $47.653$ $0.639$ $0.979$ 15 $0.431$ $4.504$ $41.1$ $52.63$ $0.741$ $0.981$ 16 $0.110$ $1.241$ $14.4$ $17.493$ $0.243$ $0.988$ 17 $0.053$ $0.450$ $7.6$ $9.512$ $0.067$ $0.980$ 18 $0.345$ $5.892$ $15.5$ $42.469$ $1.002$ $0.948$ 19 $0.128$ $0.973$ $12.6$ $18.987$ $0.243$ $0.985$ 20 $0.055$ $0.444$ $5.9$ $7.546$ $0.153$ $0.987$ 21 $0.057$ $0.508$ $5.7$ $7.595$ $0.123$ $0.987$ 22 $0.098$ $0.370$ $14.1$ $16.906$ $0.233$ $0.981$ 23 $0.104$ $0.395$ $14.6$ $17.264$ $0.263$ $0.983$ 24 $0.206$ $2.680$ $19.6$ $36.430$ $0.601$ $0.982$ 25 $0.067$ $0.781$ $10.5$ $11.581$ $0.120$ $0.987$ 26 $0.100$ $0.872$ $12.1$ $22.207$ $0.248$ $0.972$ 27 $0.0106$ $1.757$ $12.7$ $20.670$ $0.253$ $0.988$
 DMU j IT Fixed No. of Deposits Profit Fraction $\rm {budget}$ ${\mbox{assets}}$ ${\mbox{employees }}$ of loans $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ $({＄ \ \mbox{billions})}$ ${\mbox{recovered}}$ $X_1$ $X_2$ $X_3$ $Z$ $Y_1$ $Y_2$ 1 $0.150$ $0.713$ $13.3$ $14.478$ $0.232$ $0.986$ 2 $0.170$ $1.071$ $16.9$ $19.502$ $0.340$ $0.986$ 3 $0.235$ $1.224$ $24.0$ $20.952$ $0.363$ $0.986$ 4 $0.211$ $0.363$ $15.6$ $13.902$ $0.211$ $0.982$ 5 $0.133$ $0.409$ $18.485$ $15.206$ $0.237$ $0.984$ 6 $0.497$ $5.846$ $56.42$ $81.186$ $1.103$ $0.955$ 7 $0.060$ $0.918$ $56.42$ $81.186$ $1.103$ $0.986$ 8 $0.071$ $1.235$ $12.0$ $11.441$ $0.199$ $0.985$ 9 $1.500$ $18.120$ $89.51$ $124.072$ $1.858$ $0.972$ 10 $0.120$ $1.821$ $19.8$ $17.425$ $0.274$ $0.983$ 11 $0.120$ $1.915$ $19.8$ $17.425$ $0.274$ $0.983$ 12 $0.050$ $0.874$ $13.1$ $14.342$ $0.177$ $0.985$ 13 $0.370$ $6.918$ $12.5$ $32.491$ $0.648$ $0.945$ 14 $0.440$ $4.432$ $41.9$ $47.653$ $0.639$ $0.979$ 15 $0.431$ $4.504$ $41.1$ $52.63$ $0.741$ $0.981$ 16 $0.110$ $1.241$ $14.4$ $17.493$ $0.243$ $0.988$ 17 $0.053$ $0.450$ $7.6$ $9.512$ $0.067$ $0.980$ 18 $0.345$ $5.892$ $15.5$ $42.469$ $1.002$ $0.948$ 19 $0.128$ $0.973$ $12.6$ $18.987$ $0.243$ $0.985$ 20 $0.055$ $0.444$ $5.9$ $7.546$ $0.153$ $0.987$ 21 $0.057$ $0.508$ $5.7$ $7.595$ $0.123$ $0.987$ 22 $0.098$ $0.370$ $14.1$ $16.906$ $0.233$ $0.981$ 23 $0.104$ $0.395$ $14.6$ $17.264$ $0.263$ $0.983$ 24 $0.206$ $2.680$ $19.6$ $36.430$ $0.601$ $0.982$ 25 $0.067$ $0.781$ $10.5$ $11.581$ $0.120$ $0.987$ 26 $0.100$ $0.872$ $12.1$ $22.207$ $0.248$ $0.972$ 27 $0.0106$ $1.757$ $12.7$ $20.670$ $0.253$ $0.988$
The system efficiency, $\theta_p^{\ast},$ and the membership degree, $\alpha_p, p = 1, 2, \cdots, 27.$
 DMU j Model (2) $\theta^{\ast}$ ${ \text{Model (6)}}$ DMU j Model (2)$\theta^{\ast}$ ${ \text{Model (6)}}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ $1$ $0.6388$ $0.3612$ $0.6388$ $15$ $0.6582$ $0.3418$ $0.6582$ $2$ $0.6507$ $0.3493$ $0.6507$ $16$ $0.6646$ $0.3354$ $0.6646$ $3$ $0.5179$ $0.4821$ $0.5179$ $17$ $0.7177$ $0.2823$ $0.7177$ $4$ $0.5986$ $0.4014$ $0.5986$ $18$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $5$ $0.5556$ $0.4444$ $0.5556$ $19$ $0.8144$ $0.1856$ $0.8144$ $6$ $0.7599$ $0.2401$ $0.7599$ $20$ $0.6940$ $0.3060$ $0.6940$ $7$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $21$ $0.7067$ $0.2933$ $0.7067$ $8$ $0.5352$ $0.4648$ $0.5352$ $22$ $0.7942$ $0.2058$ $0.7942$ $9$ $0.6249$ $0.3751$ $0.6249$ $23$ $0.7802$ $0.2198$ $0.7802$ $10$ $0.4961$ $0.5039$ $0.4961$ $24$ $0.9300$ $0.0700$ $0.9300$ $11$ $0.4945$ $0.5055$ $0.4945$ $25$ $0.6270$ $0.3730$ $0.6270$ $12$ $0.6685$ $0.3315$ $0.6685$ $26$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $13$ $0.9487$ $0.0513$ $0.9487$ $27$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $14$ $0.5880$ $0.4120$ $0.5880$
 DMU j Model (2) $\theta^{\ast}$ ${ \text{Model (6)}}$ DMU j Model (2)$\theta^{\ast}$ ${ \text{Model (6)}}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ $1$ $0.6388$ $0.3612$ $0.6388$ $15$ $0.6582$ $0.3418$ $0.6582$ $2$ $0.6507$ $0.3493$ $0.6507$ $16$ $0.6646$ $0.3354$ $0.6646$ $3$ $0.5179$ $0.4821$ $0.5179$ $17$ $0.7177$ $0.2823$ $0.7177$ $4$ $0.5986$ $0.4014$ $0.5986$ $18$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $5$ $0.5556$ $0.4444$ $0.5556$ $19$ $0.8144$ $0.1856$ $0.8144$ $6$ $0.7599$ $0.2401$ $0.7599$ $20$ $0.6940$ $0.3060$ $0.6940$ $7$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $21$ $0.7067$ $0.2933$ $0.7067$ $8$ $0.5352$ $0.4648$ $0.5352$ $22$ $0.7942$ $0.2058$ $0.7942$ $9$ $0.6249$ $0.3751$ $0.6249$ $23$ $0.7802$ $0.2198$ $0.7802$ $10$ $0.4961$ $0.5039$ $0.4961$ $24$ $0.9300$ $0.0700$ $0.9300$ $11$ $0.4945$ $0.5055$ $0.4945$ $25$ $0.6270$ $0.3730$ $0.6270$ $12$ $0.6685$ $0.3315$ $0.6685$ $26$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $13$ $0.9487$ $0.0513$ $0.9487$ $27$ $1.0000$ $0.0000$ $1.0000$ $14$ $0.5880$ $0.4120$ $0.5880$
The results of solving the proposed fuzzy non-discretionary Model (14)
 $\begin{array}{c} \mbox{DMU}\\ j \end{array}$ Fuzzy non-discretionary input $\bar{X}_{1j}^{\ast}$ $\bar{X}_{2j}^{\ast}$ $\bar{X}_{3j}^{\ast}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ Rank 1 0.1102 0.5236 9.6335 0.2654 0.7346 18 2 0.1260 0.7723 12.4259 0.2589 0.7411 17 3 0.1586 0.8079 16.1328 0.3253 0.6747 25 4 0.1506 0.2564 10.9013 0.2864 0.7136 21 5 0.0921 0.2793 11.2165 0.3077 0.6923 23 6 0.4008 4.6342 45.4289 0.1936 0.8064 10 7 0.0600 0.9180 56.4200 0.0000 1.0000 1 8 0.0485 0.7677 8.0988 0.3173 0.6827 24 9 1.0908 13.1471 64.8529 0.2728 0.7272 20 10 0.0798 1.0715 12.8295 0.3351 0.6649 26 11 0.0797 1.0997 12.7416 0.3358 0.6642 27 12 0.0376 0.6544 9.7883 0.2490 0.7510 14 13 0.3519 5.3291 11.8900 0.0488 0.9512 5 14 0.3116 3.1047 29.5929 0.2918 0.7082 22 15 0.3212 3.2772 30.4969 0.2547 0.7453 16 16 0.0824 0.8943 10.7729 0.2512 0.7488 15 17 0.0413 0.3509 5.8871 0.2202 0.7798 11 18 0.3450 5.8920 15.5000 0.0000 1.0000 1 19 0.1080 0.8154 10.6151 0.1565 0.8435 7 20 0.0421 0.3349 4.4948 0.2343 0.7657 13 21 0.0441 0.3904 4.3686 0.2268 0.7732 12 22 0.0813 0.3043 11.6775 0.1707 0.8293 8 23 0.0853 0.3216 11.9554 0.1802 0.8198 9 24 0.1925 2.4125 18.3176 0.0654 0.9346 6 25 0.0488 0.5448 7.5342 0.2717 0.7283 19 26 0.1000 0.8720 12.1000 0.0000 1.0000 1 27 0.0106 1.7570 12.7000 0.0000 1.0000 1
 $\begin{array}{c} \mbox{DMU}\\ j \end{array}$ Fuzzy non-discretionary input $\bar{X}_{1j}^{\ast}$ $\bar{X}_{2j}^{\ast}$ $\bar{X}_{3j}^{\ast}$ $\alpha^{\ast}$ $1-\alpha^{\ast}$ Rank 1 0.1102 0.5236 9.6335 0.2654 0.7346 18 2 0.1260 0.7723 12.4259 0.2589 0.7411 17 3 0.1586 0.8079 16.1328 0.3253 0.6747 25 4 0.1506 0.2564 10.9013 0.2864 0.7136 21 5 0.0921 0.2793 11.2165 0.3077 0.6923 23 6 0.4008 4.6342 45.4289 0.1936 0.8064 10 7 0.0600 0.9180 56.4200 0.0000 1.0000 1 8 0.0485 0.7677 8.0988 0.3173 0.6827 24 9 1.0908 13.1471 64.8529 0.2728 0.7272 20 10 0.0798 1.0715 12.8295 0.3351 0.6649 26 11 0.0797 1.0997 12.7416 0.3358 0.6642 27 12 0.0376 0.6544 9.7883 0.2490 0.7510 14 13 0.3519 5.3291 11.8900 0.0488 0.9512 5 14 0.3116 3.1047 29.5929 0.2918 0.7082 22 15 0.3212 3.2772 30.4969 0.2547 0.7453 16 16 0.0824 0.8943 10.7729 0.2512 0.7488 15 17 0.0413 0.3509 5.8871 0.2202 0.7798 11 18 0.3450 5.8920 15.5000 0.0000 1.0000 1 19 0.1080 0.8154 10.6151 0.1565 0.8435 7 20 0.0421 0.3349 4.4948 0.2343 0.7657 13 21 0.0441 0.3904 4.3686 0.2268 0.7732 12 22 0.0813 0.3043 11.6775 0.1707 0.8293 8 23 0.0853 0.3216 11.9554 0.1802 0.8198 9 24 0.1925 2.4125 18.3176 0.0654 0.9346 6 25 0.0488 0.5448 7.5342 0.2717 0.7283 19 26 0.1000 0.8720 12.1000 0.0000 1.0000 1 27 0.0106 1.7570 12.7000 0.0000 1.0000 1
 [1] Chih-Chiang Fang. Bayesian decision making in determining optimal leased term and preventive maintenance scheme for leased facilities. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020127 [2] Saeed Assani, Muhammad Salman Mansoor, Faisal Asghar, Yongjun Li, Feng Yang. Efficiency, RTS, and marginal returns from salary on the performance of the NBA players: A parallel DEA network with shared inputs. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021053 [3] İsmail Özcan, Sirma Zeynep Alparslan Gök. On cooperative fuzzy bubbly games. Journal of Dynamics & Games, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jdg.2021010 [4] Roberto Civino, Riccardo Longo. Formal security proof for a scheme on a topological network. Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 2021  doi: 10.3934/amc.2021009 [5] Haripriya Barman, Magfura Pervin, Sankar Kumar Roy, Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber. Back-ordered inventory model with inflation in a cloudy-fuzzy environment. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 1913-1941. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020052 [6] Xinfang Zhang, Jing Lu, Yan Peng. Decision framework for location and selection of container multimodal hubs: A case in china under the belt and road initiative. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021061 [7] Rui Hu, Yuan Yuan. Stability, bifurcation analysis in a neural network model with delay and diffusion. Conference Publications, 2009, 2009 (Special) : 367-376. doi: 10.3934/proc.2009.2009.367 [8] Jingni Guo, Junxiang Xu, Zhenggang He, Wei Liao. Research on cascading failure modes and attack strategies of multimodal transport network. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020159 [9] Andrey Kovtanyuk, Alexander Chebotarev, Nikolai Botkin, Varvara Turova, Irina Sidorenko, Renée Lampe. Modeling the pressure distribution in a spatially averaged cerebral capillary network. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2021  doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2021016 [10] Mostafa Ghelichi, A. M. Goltabar, H. R. Tavakoli, A. Karamodin. Neuro-fuzzy active control optimized by Tug of war optimization method for seismically excited benchmark highway bridge. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (3) : 333-351. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020029 [11] Reza Lotfi, Yahia Zare Mehrjerdi, Mir Saman Pishvaee, Ahmad Sadeghieh, Gerhard-Wilhelm Weber. A robust optimization model for sustainable and resilient closed-loop supply chain network design considering conditional value at risk. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021, 11 (2) : 221-253. doi: 10.3934/naco.2020023 [12] Haodong Chen, Hongchun Sun, Yiju Wang. A complementarity model and algorithm for direct multi-commodity flow supply chain network equilibrium problem. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 2217-2242. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020066 [13] Ru Li, Guolin Yu. Strict efficiency of a multi-product supply-demand network equilibrium model. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021, 17 (4) : 2203-2215. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020065 [14] Alberto Bressan, Ke Han, Franco Rampazzo. On the control of non holonomic systems by active constraints. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2013, 33 (8) : 3329-3353. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2013.33.3329 [15] Xinyuan Liao, Caidi Zhao, Shengfan Zhou. Compact uniform attractors for dissipative non-autonomous lattice dynamical systems. Communications on Pure & Applied Analysis, 2007, 6 (4) : 1087-1111. doi: 10.3934/cpaa.2007.6.1087 [16] Pascal Noble, Sebastien Travadel. Non-persistence of roll-waves under viscous perturbations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2001, 1 (1) : 61-70. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2001.1.61 [17] Vieri Benci, Marco Cococcioni. The algorithmic numbers in non-archimedean numerical computing environments. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2021, 14 (5) : 1673-1692. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020449 [18] Liqin Qian, Xiwang Cao. Character sums over a non-chain ring and their applications. Advances in Mathematics of Communications, 2021  doi: 10.3934/amc.2020134 [19] Pengyu Chen. Periodic solutions to non-autonomous evolution equations with multi-delays. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021, 26 (6) : 2921-2939. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020211 [20] Héctor Barge. Čech cohomology, homoclinic trajectories and robustness of non-saddle sets. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2021, 41 (6) : 2677-2698. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020381

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366

## Tools

Article outline

Figures and Tables