Maximal object

Clearly defined assessment criteria. Clearly defining the criteria against which existing PSM programs will be evaluated helps to minimize the margin for error and maximize objectivity. Ill-defined evaluation criteria require the person conducting the assessment to rely solely on individual skill and experience, which may or may not yield objective results. 

Notably, direct maximization and minimization should be taken for a maximizing objective to obtain the ideal and anti-ideal solutions. 

Step 2. Based on the importance of different objective functions and the acceptable ranges for objective values, subjectively select suitable lower/upper bounds, 4 < 4 < 4 < for minimizing objective and < 4 < 4 < 4 for maximizing objective. Define membership functions for multiple fuzzy objectives as given in Eqs. (12) and (13). 

The Cournot model is a standard oligopoly model, and it is often used in competition policy as a first approximation of how competition works (Martin, 1993). For our modelling purposes, the Cournot oligopoly model offered the best combination - faithful representation of market cost structure and behaviour, and flexibility to incorporate a mixture of profit-maximizing and sales-maximizing objectives - as well as tractable conversion into a spreadsheet modelling application. 

The mathematical model of FCC feed optimization described in section 9.2.3 was programmed in MATLAB model-files where the various constraints were formulated as objective components in the hard form. Applying the duality principle, the various maximization objectives were converted to minimization functions by simply negating them (Dantzig and Thapa, 1997 Deb, 2001). These model files were linked to the MOEA Toolbox to obtain the optimized values for the various control variables. LP was also applied and its solutions were used as a basis for comparison. 

Maximal objects Objects, for which no other objects exist in the data set, which can be classified worse are called maximal objects. In WHASSE maximal objects are assigned to the uppermost level in the diagram. 

For example the successor set of the maximal object ECO is composed of the objects CIV, EHC, PES and UMV. The maximal object EFD has only two successors, namely ENV and BID. There are four levels ... 

NRA is now a maximal object and no longer an isolated object. The only isolated object in this approach is SID. ENV is no longer a minimal object but one level above. Further differences are found in Table 4 where three diagrams are compared. 

Young, K.D., and Shumway, C.R. 1991, Cow-calf producers perceived profit maximization objective a logit analysis, Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 23 129-136. 

The profit maximization objective has a tendency toward a centralized supply chain network by selecting 13 out of 20 suppliers in order to minimize the total cost. The supply chain profit is 13,248,680, representing the ideal profit value, and the supply density is 1.34. On the other hand, the density maximization objective has a tendency toward a decentralized supply chain network by selecting all 20 suppliers. The supply chain profit is 12,055,457, and the supply density value is 96.63, representing the ideal density value. More suppliers are selected when decision maker gives higher priority to the density objective, as shown in Table 3. 

This section presents the formulation of the MINLP finite volume model the goal here is to perform electrode placement as well as imposed voltage profile optimization for maximization of A1 production under mass, heat and molar species balance constraints. The mathematical formulation is based on a CSTR series steady state process model each finite volume is assumed a CSTR with perfect separation of reactants and products. Thus, the A1 maximization objective function and the balance constraints are written as ... 

From Table 7.12, the best values for profit and demand fulfillment (which are maximization objectives) are 100,541,267.5 and 100. The best values for delivery time to customers, facility disruption risk, and transportation... 

In this section, the model is first solved with the profit maximization objective. The model for this example has 11,723 variables (11,643 continuous variables and 80 binary variables) and 808 constraints. The model took approximately 12 seconds to solve for optimality. The optimal profit achieved by the model for this example is 12,295,957. 

First, we presented and analyzed the MILP model with tiie profit maximization objective using an illustrative example. Then, we proposed an interactive optimization algprithm to solve tiie proposed bi-criteria MILP model. The algorithm was illustrated using an example. The results showed the ability of the method to take the DM s preferences and systematically solve the bi-criteria problem. Also, the method posed less cognitive burden on tiie DM because the DM only had to compare two solutions and give his preference. 

This objective function maximizes profits for the firm. When using a profit maximization objective function, a manager should modify the constraint in Equation 5.1 to be... 

The constraint in Equation 5.18 is more appropriate than the constraint in Equation 5.1 because it allows the network designer to identify the demand that can be satisfied profitably and the demand that is satisfied at a loss to the firm. The plant location model with Equation 5.18 instead of Equation 5.1 and a profit maximization objective function will serve only that portion of demand that is profitable to serve. This may result in some markets in which a portion of the demand is dropped, unless constrained otherwise, because it cannot be served profitably. 

---