基于偏好和机会平衡模型对多偏好申请人进行多机会分配

Weiling Zhang, Shuang Chen, Di Fan
{"title":"基于偏好和机会平衡模型对多偏好申请人进行多机会分配","authors":"Weiling Zhang, Shuang Chen, Di Fan","doi":"10.1109/ICEMSI.2013.6913984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study developed a concise but balanced spreadsheet model, and considered both of the preferences of applicants and the fairness among chances. It set two weights in the model, in which one weight is for preference and the second is for chance preference ratio. The purpose can be achieved to maximize the sum of double-weighted score. The model is tested through a case study, which involves 65 applicants and 7 tasks. Each applicant can choose 3 preferred tasks and finally each applicant only be assigned to one task. The double-weighted method is proved to surpass the manual operation and single-weighted (preference) method both in preference success rate index and in average score variance index.","PeriodicalId":433830,"journal":{"name":"2013 International Conference on Engineering, Management Science and Innovation (ICEMSI)","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assigning multi-preferences applicants to multi chances based on preference and chance balanced model\",\"authors\":\"Weiling Zhang, Shuang Chen, Di Fan\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/ICEMSI.2013.6913984\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study developed a concise but balanced spreadsheet model, and considered both of the preferences of applicants and the fairness among chances. It set two weights in the model, in which one weight is for preference and the second is for chance preference ratio. The purpose can be achieved to maximize the sum of double-weighted score. The model is tested through a case study, which involves 65 applicants and 7 tasks. Each applicant can choose 3 preferred tasks and finally each applicant only be assigned to one task. The double-weighted method is proved to surpass the manual operation and single-weighted (preference) method both in preference success rate index and in average score variance index.\",\"PeriodicalId\":433830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2013 International Conference on Engineering, Management Science and Innovation (ICEMSI)\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2013 International Conference on Engineering, Management Science and Innovation (ICEMSI)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMSI.2013.6913984\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 International Conference on Engineering, Management Science and Innovation (ICEMSI)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEMSI.2013.6913984","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究开发了一个简洁但平衡的电子表格模型,并考虑了申请人的偏好和机会的公平性。在模型中设置两个权重,其中一个权重表示偏好,另一个权重表示机会偏好比。这样可以达到双重加权分数总和最大化的目的。该模型通过一个案例研究进行了测试,该案例研究涉及65名申请人和7项任务。每个申请人可以选择3个优先任务,最后每个申请人只分配一个任务。结果表明,双加权方法在偏好成功率指标和平均分方差指标上均优于手工操作和单加权(偏好)方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assigning multi-preferences applicants to multi chances based on preference and chance balanced model
This study developed a concise but balanced spreadsheet model, and considered both of the preferences of applicants and the fairness among chances. It set two weights in the model, in which one weight is for preference and the second is for chance preference ratio. The purpose can be achieved to maximize the sum of double-weighted score. The model is tested through a case study, which involves 65 applicants and 7 tasks. Each applicant can choose 3 preferred tasks and finally each applicant only be assigned to one task. The double-weighted method is proved to surpass the manual operation and single-weighted (preference) method both in preference success rate index and in average score variance index.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Siting based on fuzzy improved analytic hierarchy process Loss function based robust scaling parameters for composite dispatching rule ATCS Behavioral game analysis between the supply and demand of oversea hydropower investment income insurance The impact of the convergence on IFRS Development and develop strategy of Macau creative tourism souvenirs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1