指标可取负值的基于输入与输出的DEA模型

有关基于输入与输出的DEA模型,本文与现有文献的不同之处,一是模型中的评价指标可取负值,二是被评的决策单元可以不是所给的n个决策单元之一,三是模型并非由多目标规划模型推得.此外,给出了有关此模型的三个定理.因此,可知有关此模型的最优解存在的充分条件;在求解此模型后就能在判断决策单元的DEA有效性的同时计算出其相对效率,并能计算出其在DEA相对有效面上的"投影".     

扩展的逆DEA问题

扩展的逆DEA问题与逆DEA问题的区别在于变化后的被评决策单元的效率指数为给定的数p(0相似文献   

关于DEA有效性“新方法”的探讨

主要指出文献[1],[2]中所用的"新方法"不能完全区分决策单元的DEA有效性和弱DEA有效性.同时,"新方法"中所使用的DEA模型(即文献[3]中超效率DEA模型)的最优解不一定存在,这也是"新方法"使用中的一大缺陷.本文同时指出"新方法"虽然是可以扩充的,但扩充后,某些"新模型"仍然会出现上述问题.如果单纯的去评价决策单元的DEA有效性、弱DEA有效性和非弱DEA有效性时,建议还是使用传统的经典模型为好;如果需要进一步对DEA有效性再进行分析,是可以象最早提出超效率DEA模型的文献[3]中那样去应用超效率DEA模型。     

强DEA有效性的探讨

给出了有关强DEA有效(C2R或C2GS2)的一些必要条件,判断方法及等价的命题,特别是给出了其存在性定理、及有关强DEA有效与扩展DEA有效等价的定理.     

链式网络DEA模型

数据包络分析(DEA)是评价决策单元(DMU)相对有效性的一种工具,现已得到广泛的应用.传统的DEA不考虑系统内部结构,而是将系统作为一个"黑箱"来度量效率.针对多阶段网络结构提出一个新的网络DEA模型—链式网络DEA模型.研究网络决策单元的网络DEA有效性及各个阶段的弱DEA有效性之间的关系,给出了网络DEA有效的充分必要条件.若网络决策单元不是网络DEA有效的,根据模型可以指出系统在哪些阶段是无效的.     

广义超效率区间DEA模型及其有效性研究

根据样本单元的区间投入、区间产出定义最大样本生产可能集,建立基于最大样本生产可能集的广义超效率区间DEA模型,然后定义了待评价决策单元基于广义超效率区间DEA模型的超效率区间,并讨论了待评价决策单元的有效性,最后通过实例表明了广义超效率区间DEA模型的实用性.     

聚类分析在确定广义DEA方法样本单元集中的应用

利用基于BC~2模型的只有输出的DEA模型(D-BC_O~2)来评价决策单元的有效性时,得到的效率值有时会与定性分析存在一定的差异.为了解决这类问题,引入只有产出的广义DEA模型(DG-BC_O~2),并利用聚类分析方法确定样本单元集,给出(DG_(cluster)模型来评价决策单元的有效性.最后通过2009年中国各省市人均经济发展数据进行演示,说明利用聚类分析方法确定样本单元集具有一定的可行性.     

成本最小问题与(弱)DEA有效性

在文[1]的基础上,本文证明了在一定条件下对所给的决策单元、其弱DEA有效性或DEA有效性能由成本最小问题的最优解来判断.     

Interval DEA模型中决策单元的投影问题

在传统的DEA模型中,最优相对效率模型是在不大于1的范围内研究决策单元的效率的,最差相对效率模型是在不小于1的范围内研究决策单元的效率,这两种模型在研究投影问题时,是在不同的范围内进行的,有一定的片面性.将在interval DEA模型中,研究决策单元的投影问题,该模型是在相同的约束域内研究最优和最差相对效率模型,得出的结论将更加全面,通过两个定理给出了非DEA有效的决策单元在DEA有效面上的投影表达式和非DEA无效的决策单元在DEA无效面上的投影表达式.同时,通过一个实例对决策单元在interval DEA模型中的投影结果与在传统的DEA模型的投影结果进行了比较,发现投影结果比传统模型得到的投影结果对实际的生产有更强的指导意义.     

灰变量逆DEA模型的初步研究

初步研究了变量为区间灰数的逆DEA模型。变量为区间灰数时,决策单元效率水平保持不变表达为:对决策单元的输入输出值改变前后对应的灰区间效率进行比较,前者大于等于后者与小于等于后者的可信度相等(均等于0.5)。给出了决策单元非DEA有效时,灰区间变量逆DEA模型解存在的充要条件及一般表达式,以及决策单元弱DEA有效时灰变量逆DEA模型的部分解。     

Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility

Super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) model is obtained when a decision making unit (DMU) under evaluation is excluded from the reference set. Because of the possible infeasibility of super-efficiency DEA model, the use of super-efficiency DEA model has been restricted to the situations where constant returns to scale (CRS) are assumed. It is shown that one of the input-oriented and output-oriented super-efficiency DEA models must be feasible for a any efficient DMU under evaluation if the variable returns to scale (VRS) frontier consists of increasing, constant, and decreasing returns to scale DMUs. We use both input- and output-oriented super-efficiency models to fully characterize the super-efficiency. When super-efficiency is used as an efficiency stability measure, infeasibility means the highest super-efficiency (stability). If super-efficiency is interpreted as input saving or output surplus achieved by a specific efficient DMU, infeasibility does not necessary mean the highest super-efficiency.     

Super-efficiency DEA in the presence of infeasibility

It is well known that super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach can be infeasible under the condition of variable returns to scale (VRS). By extending of the work of Chen (2005), the current study develops a two-stage process for calculating super-efficiency scores regardless whether the standard VRS super-efficiency mode is feasible or not. The proposed approach examines whether the standard VRS super-efficiency DEA model is infeasible. When the model is feasible, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that are identical to those arising from the original model. For efficient DMUs that are infeasible under the super-efficiency model, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that characterize input savings and/or output surpluses. The current study also shows that infeasibility may imply that an efficient DMU does not exhibit super-efficiency in inputs or outputs. When infeasibility occurs, it can be necessary that (i) both inputs and outputs be decreased to reach the frontier formed by the remaining DMUs under the input-orientation and (ii) both inputs and outputs be increased to reach the frontier formed by the remaining DMUs under the output-orientation. The newly developed approach is illustrated with numerical examples.     

Super-efficiency infeasibility and zero data in DEA

Lee et al. (2011) and Chen and Liang (2011) develop a data envelopment analysis (DEA) model to address the infeasibility issue in super-efficiency models. In this paper, we point out that their model is feasible when input data are positive but can be infeasible when some of input is zero. Their model is modified so that the new super-efficiency DEA model is always feasible when data are non-negative. Note that zero data can make the super-efficiency model under constant returns to scale (CRS) infeasible. Our discussion is based upon variable returns to scale (VRS) and can be applied to CRS super-efficiency models.     

Super-efficiency and DEA sensitivity analysis

This paper discusses and reviews the use of super-efficiency approach in data envelopment analysis (DEA) sensitivity analyses. It is shown that super-efficiency score can be decomposed into two data perturbation components of a particular test frontier decision making unit (DMU) and the remaining DMUs. As a result, DEA sensitivity analysis can be done in (1) a general situation where data for a test DMU and data for the remaining DMUs are allowed to vary simultaneously and unequally and (2) the worst-case scenario where the efficiency of the test DMU is deteriorating while the efficiencies of the other DMUs are improving. The sensitivity analysis approach developed in this paper can be applied to DMUs on the entire frontier and to all basic DEA models. Necessary and sufficient conditions for preserving a DMU’s efficiency classification are developed when various data changes are applied to all DMUs. Possible infeasibility of super-efficiency DEA models is only associated with extreme-efficient DMUs and indicates efficiency stability to data perturbations in all DMUs.     

A modified super-efficiency DEA model for infeasibility

The super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) model is obtained when a decision making unit (DMU) under evaluation is excluded from the reference set. This model provides for a measure of stability of the “efficient” status for frontier DMUs. Under the assumption of variable returns to scale (VRS), the super efficiency model can be infeasible for some efficient DMUs, specifically those at the extremities of the frontier. The current study develops an approach to overcome infeasibility issues. It is shown that when the model is feasible, our approach yields super-efficiency scores that are equivalent to those arising from the original model. For efficient DMUs that are infeasible under the super-efficiency model, our approach yields optimal solutions and scores that characterize the extent of super-efficiency in both inputs and outputs. The newly developed approach is illustrated with two real world data sets.     

Super-efficiency DEA in the presence of infeasibility: One model approach

A two-stage procedure is developed by Lee et al. (2011) [European Journal of Operational Research doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.01.022] to address the infeasibility issue in super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) models. We point out that their two-stage procedure can be solved in a single DEA-based model.     

A comment on “Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility”

In a recent paper by Chen [Chen, Y., 2005. Measuring super-efficiency in DEA in the presence of infeasibility. European Journal of Operational Research 161 (1), 447–468], he deals with the infeasibility of super-efficiency DEA models in variable returns to scale (VRS) technology. He provides a necessary and sufficient condition for simultaneous infeasibility of input- and output-oriented super-efficiency DEA models in VRS case, then he claims that both of these models are infeasible only for a rare situation. In this paper, we present some counterexamples and comments to the contention by Chen.     

A directional distance based super-efficiency DEA model handling negative data

This paper develops a new radial super-efficiency data envelopment analysis (DEA) model, which allows input–output variables to take both negative and positive values. Compared with existing DEA models capable of dealing with negative data, the proposed model can rank the efficient DMUs and is feasible no matter whether the input–output data are non-negative or not. It successfully addresses the infeasibility issue of both the conventional radial super-efficiency DEA model and the Nerlove–Luenberger super-efficiency DEA model under the assumption of variable returns to scale. Moreover, it can project each DMU onto the super-efficiency frontier along a suitable direction and never leads to worse target inputs or outputs than the original ones for inefficient DMUs. Additional advantages of the proposed model include monotonicity, units invariance and output translation invariance. Two numerical examples demonstrate the practicality and superiority of the new model.     

基于超效率DEA的中国省际能源效率评价

基于全要素投资效率框架,结合能源效率的内涵与特点,构建了以能源消费总量、从业人员总数和资本存量为投入指标、GDP为产出指标的能源效率评价指标体系;基于超效率DEA方法建立了能源效率评价模型,并对我国2000-2010年29省进行了实证研究.结果显示:东部能源效率最高,中部次之,而西部能源效率最低;中国能源效率变异系数先降后升,省际能源效率差距逐渐拉大.与传统的DEA方法相比,基于超效率DEA的能源效率评价模型更具应用优势.