# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

• Previous Article
The optimal solution to a principal-agent problem with unknown agent ability
• JIMO Home
• This Issue
• Next Article
Robust equilibrium control-measure policy for a DC pension plan with state-dependent risk aversion under mean-variance criterion
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, doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020046
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
General network systems [12]
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] Xiao-Xu Chen, Peng Xu, Jiao-Jiao Li, Thomas Walker, Guo-Qiang Yang. Decision-making in a retailer-led closed-loop supply chain involving a third-party logistics provider. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021014 [2] Yu-Jhe Huang, Zhong-Fu Huang, Jonq Juang, Yu-Hao Liang. Flocking of non-identical Cucker-Smale models on general coupling network. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021, 26 (2) : 1111-1127. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2020155 [3] Ziang Long, Penghang Yin, Jack Xin. Global convergence and geometric characterization of slow to fast weight evolution in neural network training for classifying linearly non-separable data. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2021, 15 (1) : 41-62. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2020077 [4] Reza Chaharpashlou, Abdon Atangana, Reza Saadati. On the fuzzy stability results for fractional stochastic Volterra integral equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020432 [5] Qiang Fu, Yanlong Zhang, Yushu Zhu, Ting Li. Network centralities, demographic disparities, and voluntary participation. Mathematical Foundations of Computing, 2020, 3 (4) : 249-262. doi: 10.3934/mfc.2020011 [6] Zonghong Cao, Jie Min. Selection and impact of decision mode of encroachment and retail service in a dual-channel supply chain. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020167 [7] Ali Mahmoodirad, Harish Garg, Sadegh Niroomand. Solving fuzzy linear fractional set covering problem by a goal programming based solution approach. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020162 [8] Shipra Singh, Aviv Gibali, Xiaolong Qin. Cooperation in traffic network problems via evolutionary split variational inequalities. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2020  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2020170 [9] Yicheng Liu, Yipeng Chen, Jun Wu, Xiao Wang. Periodic consensus in network systems with general distributed processing delays. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2020  doi: 10.3934/nhm.2021002 [10] Rajendra K C Khatri, Brendan J Caseria, Yifei Lou, Guanghua Xiao, Yan Cao. Automatic extraction of cell nuclei using dilated convolutional network. Inverse Problems & Imaging, 2021, 15 (1) : 27-40. doi: 10.3934/ipi.2020049 [11] Editorial Office. Retraction: Honggang Yu, An efficient face recognition algorithm using the improved convolutional neural network. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2019, 12 (4&5) : 901-901. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2019060 [12] Denis Serre. Non-linear electromagnetism and special relativity. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2009, 23 (1&2) : 435-454. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.23.435 [13] Vieri Benci, Marco Cococcioni. The algorithmic numbers in non-archimedean numerical computing environments. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020449 [14] Héctor Barge. Čech cohomology, homoclinic trajectories and robustness of non-saddle sets. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2020  doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020381 [15] Ying Lin, Qi Ye. Support vector machine classifiers by non-Euclidean margins. Mathematical Foundations of Computing, 2020, 3 (4) : 279-300. doi: 10.3934/mfc.2020018 [16] Sergey Rashkovskiy. Hamilton-Jacobi theory for Hamiltonian and non-Hamiltonian systems. Journal of Geometric Mechanics, 2020, 12 (4) : 563-583. doi: 10.3934/jgm.2020024 [17] Noufel Frikha, Valentin Konakov, Stéphane Menozzi. Well-posedness of some non-linear stable driven SDEs. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2021, 41 (2) : 849-898. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020302 [18] Joel Kübler, Tobias Weth. Spectral asymptotics of radial solutions and nonradial bifurcation for the Hénon equation. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 2020, 40 (6) : 3629-3656. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2020032 [19] Christian Clason, Vu Huu Nhu, Arnd Rösch. Optimal control of a non-smooth quasilinear elliptic equation. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2020  doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2020052 [20] Yanan Li, Zhijian Yang, Na Feng. Uniform attractors and their continuity for the non-autonomous Kirchhoff wave models. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2021  doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2021018

2019 Impact Factor: 1.366

## Tools

Article outline

Figures and Tables