##
**Using input–output orientation model for determining most productive scale size in DEA.**
*(English)*
Zbl 1101.90366

Summary: One of the existing approaches for determining mpss is \(\alpha -\beta\) model proposed in W. W. Cooper, R. G. Thompson and R. M. Thrall’s article [Ann. Oper. Res. 66, 3–45 (1996; Zbl 0863.90003)]. The direct solving of that model is rather difficult because the objective function is fractional. Hence in this paper besides introducing a model with output–input orientation, the previous model difficulties will be removed because the new objective function is linear. And also it is proved that both models are the same in determining mpss. Furthermore by solving this model it is not necessary to scaling the data as it is necessary in CCR model so that figurative DMU move in the joint frontier of BCC and CCR models [see E. Thanassoulis, Introduction to the Theory and Applications of Data Envelopment Analysis, a foundation text with integrated software, Kluwer Academic Publishers (2001); R. D. Banker, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 17, 35–44 (1984; Zbl 0538.90030)]. So we can consider this as another merit for this model in determining mpss. We obtain the smallest and the most mpss corresponding with the evaluating DMU and also we present necessary and sufficient condition for boundedness of this model by dual model and numerical example confirms validity of this model as a means for determining mpss.

### MSC:

90B50 | Management decision making, including multiple objectives |

90C08 | Special problems of linear programming (transportation, multi-index, data envelopment analysis, etc.) |

PDF
BibTeX
XML
Cite

\textit{G. R. Jahanshahloo} and \textit{M. Khodabakhshi}, Appl. Math. Comput. 146, No. 2--3, 849--855 (2003; Zbl 1101.90366)

Full Text:
DOI

### References:

[1] | Ali, A.I; Seiford, L.M, Computational accuracy and infinitesimal in DEA, Infor, 31, 4, 290-297, (1993) · Zbl 0800.90086 |

[2] | Banker, R.D; Thrall, R.M, Estimation of return to scale using data envelopment analysis, European journal of operational research, 82, 74-84, (1992) · Zbl 0760.90001 |

[3] | Banker, R.D; Bardhan, I; Cooper, W.W, A note on returns to scale in DEA, European journal of operational research, 88, 583-585, (1996) · Zbl 0911.90040 |

[4] | Banker, R.D, Estimating most productive scale size using data envelopment analysis, European journal of operational research, 17, 35-44, (1984) · Zbl 0538.90030 |

[5] | Charnes, A; Cooper, W.W; Rhodes, E, Measuring the efficiencies of dmus, European journal of operational research, 2, 6, 429-444, (1978) · Zbl 0416.90080 |

[6] | Cooper, W.W; Thompson, R.G; Thrall, R.M, Extensions and new developments in DEA, Annals of operations research, 66, 3-45, (1996) · Zbl 0863.90003 |

[7] | G.R. Jahanshahloo, M. Khodabakhshi, A.A. Foroughi, The equivalence of some concepts in DEA, Far East Journal of Theoritical Statistics, in press · Zbl 1063.90572 |

[8] | Holger, S, Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations, European journal of operational research, 132, 400-410, (2001) · Zbl 0985.90053 |

[9] | Thanassoulis, E, Introduction to the theory and applications of data envelopment analysis, a foundation text with integrated software, (2001), Kluwer Academic Publisher |

[10] | Zhu, J; Shen, Z.H, A discussion of testing returns to scale in DEA, European journal of operational research, 81, 590-596, (1993) |

This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.