|
1. Report No.
|
2. Government Accession No.
|
3. Recipient’s
Catalog No.
CFDA 20.701
|
|
4. Title and
Subtitle
An Interactive Multiobjective Decision Support
Framework for Transportation Investment
|
5. Report Date
May 31,
2002
|
|
6. Performing
Organization Code
|
|
7. Author/s
Mashrur A. Chowdhury, PhD.,P.E., Paulin Tan, Surekha L.
William
|
8. Performing
Organization Report No.
MRUTC xx-xx
|
|
9. Performing
Organization Name and Address
Midwest
Regional University Transportation Center
University
of Wisconsin-Madison
1415
Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706
|
10. Work Unit
No. (TRAIS)
|
|
11. Contract
or Grant No.
DTRS 99-G-0005
|
|
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Department of
Transportation
Research and Special
Programs Administration
400 7th Street,
SW
Washington, DC 20590-0001
|
13. Type of
Report and Period Covered
Research
Report [Dates]
|
|
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
|
|
15.
Supplementary Notes
Project completed for the Midwest Regional University
Transportation Center.
|
|
16. Abstract
This report presents a multiobjective decision
framework to support the decision making process in transportation investment
analysis. One important capability of the multiobjective decision framework
is that it allows many intangible objectives that are difficult to express on
an absolute numerical scale to be considered without the need to convert the
units into monetary scale.
The proposed multiobjective decision framework
allows a decision maker to select a reduced number of alternatives from a
larger number of all available alternatives while ensuring that the selected
alternatives are the best possible options. This framework could also be used
to generate decision options for optimal allocation of resources between
competing projects.
The
proposed decision framework is based on three multiobjective analysis
concepts: the Surrogate Worth Tradeoff method for continuous decision
problems and the Multiattribute Utility and Minimum Tolerance methods for
discrete decision problems. These concepts help decision makers choose among,
prioritize, and generate the most feasible and optimal alternatives. The four
case studies presented as appendices demonstrate the application of the
proposed decision framework to real-world projects.
|
|
17. Key Words
decision making framework, measures of effectiveness,
multiobjective decision making, multiattribute utility method, optimization,
surrogate worth tradeoff, tradeoff
|
18.
Distribution Statement
No restrictions.
This report is available through the Transportation Research
Information Services of the National Transportation Library.
|
|
19. Security
Classification (of this report)
Unclassified
|
20. Security
Classification (of this page)
Unclassified
|
An
Interactive Multiobjective Decision Support Framework for Transportation
Investment