See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268442217

Sensitivity Analysis of Transportation Problems

Article

CITATIONS READS

5 1,158

1 author:

Niveen Badra
Ain Shams University
30 PUBLICATIONS 45 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Sensitivity analysis View project

Tolerance Fuzzy Approach View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Niveen Badra on 22 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 3(8): 668-675, 2007
© 2007, INSInet Publication

Sensitivity Analysis of Transportation Problems

N.M. Badra

Department of Physics and Eng. Math., Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University, Egypt.

Abstract: This paper presents a sensitivity analysis to multiobjective transportation problem. The proposed
approach yields to maximum tolerance percentages in multiobjective transportation problem. The weighted
sum approach is used to solve the multiobjective transportation problem. The proposed approach allows
changing in both the weights and the objective function coefficients and the right hand side constraints
simultaneously and independently from their specified values while remaining the same basis optimal.
Formulation of both perturbed solution and the corresponding perturbed objective values are presented.
An illustrative example is presented to clarify the idea of the proposed approach.

Key words: Sensitivity analysis; Parametric programming; transportation problem; Tolerance approach.

INTRODUCTION of the coefficient matrix was perturbed. The usual

Sensitivity analysis is to analyze the effect of the
changes of the objective function coefficients and the
effect of changes of the right hand side constraints on
the optimal value of the objective function as well as
the validity ranges of these effects. Studies on the
sensitivity analysis in linear programming and
multiobjective programming had been developed [1-6] .
The implementation of sensitivity analysis is based
primarily on basic optimal solutions. Degeneracy is a
complex phenomenon that may influence the
computation of optimal basic solutions and sensitivity
analysis. Therefore, it may be difficult to determine the
ranges of parameter values for which a given optimal
solution remains optimal for the transportation problem.
Thus, it has been pointed out that when degeneracy
occurs, the sensitivity analysis approach to determine
sensitivity ranges of parameters yields impractical
results. Apparently traditional sensitivity analysis is not
suitable for transportation problem. Saaty and Gass [7]
worked on perturbations in the objective function
coefficients and in the right hand side terms of the
constraints. They expressed these coefficients as linear
functions of parameters. Gal [8] had been expressed these
coefficients in matrix form. Wendell [9] had presented
tolerance approach to sensitivity analysis in linear
programming. His approach had considered changing in
the objective function coefficients and in the right hand
terms of constraints simultaneously and independently.
The objective function coefficients and the right hand
terms of constraints were changing within the
maximum tolerance percentage of their specified values
simultaneously and independently while, maintaining
same optimal solution. Barnett [ 10] worked on
perturbations in the matrix coefficients. He described
an algorithm for finding a rectangular region within
which the components of a column vector may vary.
Shetty[11] had studied the case where a single element
analysis of this case, yielded the largest interval in
which the same basis was optimal. In general, this
interval may not be closed. Saaty and Kim[12,13] had
considered perturbations in a column with a scalar
parameter. In fact, the analysis of a column
perturbation with a scalar parameter can be reduced to
the analysis of an element of the coefficient matrix
with a scalar parameter. In contrast, the tolerance
approach considers a vector perturbation of the column
which cannot be further reduced. Ravi and Wendell [14]
had presented tolerance approach to sensitivity analysis
of matrix coefficients in linear programming. Their
approach had considered changing in the elements of
a column or a row of the matrix coefficients
simultaneously and independently in a standard linear
programming problem. Their approach yielded to a
maximum tolerance percentage within which the
elements of a column may all vary simultaneously and
independently from their estimated values while still
retaining the same set of basic variables in an optimal
solution. Hansen, Labbe and Wendell [15] had presented
perturbations in multiple linear programming. Their
approach determined the maximum percentage by
which all weights can deviate simultaneously and
independently from their estimated values while
retaining the same optimal basis. They also shown how
a priori bounds on the ranges of the weights can be
exploited to yield a larger maximum tolerance
percentage. Marmol and Puerto [16] had presented special
cases of the tolerance approach in multiobjective linear
programming. They enlarged the range of meaningful
regions of weights that can be handled easily from the
tolerance approach point of view. They represented the
information that the decision maker is able to offer the
relationships between the importance of different
objectives, in terms of marginal substitution rates.
They also had presented an algorithm which
reduced the computational effort, in order to

Corresponding author: N.M. Badra, Department of Physics and Eng. Math., Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams University, Egypt.
668
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

get the maximum tolerance percentage. Lin and Wen [17]

had presented two other types of sensitivity range for P(MTP): Min [ c i j
( k )
x i j , k=1,2,…,K ] (1)
the assignment problem. The first type of sensitivity
range has used to determine the range in which the subject to:
current optimal assignment remains optimal. The
second type of sensitivity range was to determine those x i j = a i, i=1,2,…,m (2)
values of assignment model parameters for which the
rate of change of optimal value function remains
constant. x i j = b j, j=1,2,…,n (3)
In this paper, the tolerance approach to sensitivity
analysis in multiobjective transportation problems is
presented. The weighted sum approach is used to
ai = b j ( Balanced condition ) (4)
convert the multiobjective transportation problem into
a single transportation problem. The proposed approach
allows changing in both the weights, the objective x 2 0, i=1,2,…,m, j=1,2,…,n
function coefficients and in the right hand side ij

constraints terms simultaneously and independently where,

from their specified values while remaining the same
solution optimal. The proposed approach can be
considered as an extension of Wendell[9] tolerance
approach in a special case of linear programming and
in the case of multiobjective transportation problem.
Also, the proposed approach can be considered as
another tolerance approach of both Hansen, Labbe and
Wendell [15] tolerance approach in a special case of the
transportation problem that allows changing in both the
weights, the objective functions coefficients and in the
right hand side terms simultaneously and independently
from their specified values while remaining the same
solution optimal. The proposed approach differs from
their approach in allowing both weighting and objective
functions coefficients to change parametrically
according to maximum certain specified tolerance
intervals while remaining the same solution optimal.
The weights and coefficients of each objective function
are changed parametrically according to certain
specified intervals on the equivalent objective function
coefficients from the ordinary analysis only to
simultaneous and independent perturbations of the
coefficients of nonbasic variables. Similarly, the
intervals for the right hand side terms are applied only
to simultaneous and independent perturbations of the
terms in those constraints that having basic variables in
the optimal tableau. The condition of balanced
transportation problem is taken into consideration
when dealing with the right hand side constraints. The
proposed tolerance approach uses only the data of
initial and final simplex tableau of the equivalent single
linear problem. Formulation of both obtained perturbed
solution and the corresponding perturbed objective
values are presented. An illustrative example is
presented to clarify the idea of the proposed approach.
Problem Formulation: It is well known that the
transportation problem TP is a special case of linear
programming (LP). Consider the multiobjective
transportation problem P(MTP) of K objectives, each
of m sources and n destinations as follows:
(k)
c ij is the cost of transporting a unit of objective
k from source i to destination j,
x ij is the amount transported from source i to
destination j,
ai i=1,2,…,m are the availability at i source and
bj j=12,…,n are the requirement at j destination.
The m constraints (2) represent the supplies and
the n constraints (3) represent the destinations. The
balanced condition (4) will lead to reduce the total
number of constraints given by either (2) or (3) by one
i.e., total number of constraints = m + n - 1. This
means that the number of optimal basic variables in the
final optimal simples tableau is equal to m + n – 1.
The previous multiobjective transportation problem
P(MTP) given by (1-4) can be put in matrix form as follows:
P(MTP): Min [ C ( k ) X, k=1,2,…,K ] (5)
subject to:
A X = B, X 2 0 (6)
where,
C (k) is a matrix of m x n dimensional represents
the K objective coefficients,
X is a column vector of n dimensional represents
the decision variables,
A is an (m+n-1) x ( m n ) matrix representing
constraint matrix and
B is a column vector of (m+n–1) dimensional
represents the right hand side constraints.
Note that for any matrix D of r x c dimensional,
the notation D R i, i=1,2,…,r will be used to denote the
i th row, while, the notation D C j, j=1,2,…,c will be
used to denote the j th column. This means that the
matrix D can be written in row form as:

669
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

D = [ D R 1
D R 2
… D R i
…. D R r
] (7)X * = [ x 1
*
x 2
*
….. x mn
*
]t (13)

Also, the matrix D can be written in column form as: This optimum solution will be divided into two
sets of variables, the set of m + n – 1 basic variables
… D … D (8)X BC2 that takes nonnegative values and the set of nm –
*
D = [ DC1 D ]
C j C c
m – n + 1 non basic variables X * NB that takes the zero
Also, suppose that the index set of basic variables values as follows:-
is denoted by I and the index set of nonbasic variables
is denoted by J as follows: X *B = [ x B 1 *x B 2 * … x B m +n-1 *]t (14)

I = {1,2,…, m+n-1}, J = {1,2,..., m n – m – n + 1: X *

=[ x *
x *
…x *
]t = 0 (15)
NB NB1 NB2 NB mn-m-n+ 1

i * j for all i = 1,2,.., m+ n-1 } (9)

Also, the initial objective function coefficients C o will be
Weighting Approach: Several approaches for divided into two sets of coefficients, the set of m+n-1 basic
solving P(MTP) whether direct, scalarization, coefficients of the final optimal tableau
interactive or fuzzy approaches. The scalarization C o B and the set of nm–m–n+1 non basic coefficients
approach is the most common approach and the of the final optimal tableau C o NB and can be expressed
weighting approach is the most common one as follows:
among them. Weighting approach can be used for
transforming the multiobjective transportation problem C o
B = [ C B1 C B2 … C B m + n-1 ] (16)
P(MTP) into single transportation problem P(ëTP) as
follows: C o
NB = [ C NB1 C NB2 … C NB mn-m-n+ 1 ] (17)

Also, the initial matrix constraints coefficients

P (ëTP): Min [ ë X ] (10)
subject to: A o will be divided in column form into two sets,
the set of m + n - 1 basic A o B that takes the identity
A X = B (6) value only at the corresponding basic variable while
the others are zeros and the set of nm – m – n + 1
X, ë 2 0, ë non basic A o NB that takes any values.
= 1 (11)
A o
B = [ A C B1 A C B2 …… A C Bm + n-1 ] (18)
where,

A o
NB = [ A C NB1 A C NB2 …… A C NBnm -m -n+ 1 ] (19)
ë is a row vector of K–dimensional representing the objective
function weights,
While, in the final optimum simplex tableau the pervious
is an K x m n matrix representing the objective matrices will be defined as follows:
function coefficients and
is an identity column vector of K – dimensional.
= [ 1 2 ….. m + n-1 ] (20)
For simplicity, let,

B =[ B1 B2 …… B m + n-1 ] (21)
C = ë (12)
NB =[ NB1 NB2 ..… NB mn-m-n+ 1 ] (22)
Thus, the equivalent single transportation problem
P(ëTP) is given by: =[
B
..… C B m + n-1 ] (23)
C B1 CB2

P (ëTP): Min [ C X ] = [ ..… ] (24)

NB C NB1 C NB2 C NB nm-m-n+ 1
subject to:
It is clear that an optimum solution of problem
A X = B (6) P (ëTP) is an efficient solution for problem P (MTP).
X, ë 2 0, ë Î = 1 Also, note that if X * is an efficient solution of
(11) problem P(MTP), then, there exists ë = (ë1 ë2 … ëK )
such that X * is an optimal solution of problem
The optimum solution X* of problem P (ëTP) P (ëTP).
is given by: -

670
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

Perturbed Problem: Perturbations to the right hand property that the same basis is optimal in the perturbed
side constraints and to the objective function problem P(PëP) as long as the absolute value of each
coefficients to the problem P(ëTP) can be viewed as a parameter ä i satisfies the following:
perturbed problem P(PëTP) as follows:
- ä *
sä i
s ä* , i E I (33)
P(PëTP): Min [ ( 1 + áij ) cijx i j ] (25)
Also, suppose that the maximum allowable
subject to: tolerance for the objective function coefficients
perturbations T * having the property that the same
x i j = ( 1 + â i ) a i, i=1,2,…,m (26) basis is optimal in the perturbed problem P(PëP) as
long as the absolute value of each parameter T j
satisfies the following:
x i j = ( 1 + ã j ) b j, j=1,2,…,n (27)
- T *
s á ij
s T *, ( i, j ) E J (34)
(1 + â i) a i = (1 + ã j ) b j Thus, the critical region of the parameters of the
objective functions coefficients and the right hand side
constraints perturbations is denoted by
(Balanced condition) (28)
R ä, á, ë, C and is defined as follows:
x 2 0, i=1,2,…,m, j=1,2,…,n
ij
R ä, á, ë, C
= { ä, * á, ë, C: - ä** s äi s ä *, iE I
- T s a s T , ( i, j ) E J
where, ij

á ij are the multiplicative parameters of c i j (1 - ä ) b s b s (1 + ä ) b , i E I i

(1 - á ii j ) ci s i ë s (1 + ái ) c ,
representing the allowable tolerance percentage of (i, j ) E J i j i j ij

the objective function coefficients perturbations,

â I are the multiplicative parameters of á i representing ë 2 0, ë =1 } (35)
the allowable tolerance percentage of the supplies
and The tolerance approach aims at finding this critical
ã j are the multiplicative parameters of b j representing region of the parameters of both weights of the objectives,
the allowable tolerance percentage of the objective functions coefficients and the right hand side
destinations. constraints at which any change inside their ranges of this
region does not affect the optimal basis,
The multiplicative parameters á i j must not while, any change outside their rages will affect the
exceed a non negative number ô. While, the both optimal basis.
multiplicative parameters â i and ã j must not exceed a
non negative number ñ. Theorem: (Wendell [9]): The value ä * that represents
the maximum allowable tolerance for the right hand
P(PëTP): Min [ ( C ± Ù ) X ] (29) side constraints perturbations can be determined as
subject to: follows:-

A X = ( B ±Ä ) (30)
X, ë 2 0 (36)
where,
While, the value ô * that represents the maximum
Ù = [ á 11 á 12 ….. á mn ] (31)
allowable tolerance for the objective function
coefficients perturbations can be determined as
Ä = [ ä 1 ä 2 ….. ä ] t
(32)
m + n-1 follows:-
Let,

T* is a multiplicative parameter of C that represents

the maximum allowable tolerance percentage of the
objective function coefficients perturbations and
ä* is a multiplicative parameter of B that represents
the maximum allowable tolerance percentage of the
right hand side constraints perturbations.
Definition: (Critical Region of the Parameters): Suppose
that the maximum allowable tolerance for the right hand side
constraints perturbations ä * having the
(37)
Note that all the information of ä * and T * is
readily available from the original and final optimal
simplex tableau. Moreover, the critical region of the
parameters of both weights of the objectives, objective
functions coefficients and the right hand side

671
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

constraints at which any change inside their ranges Table 1: Data for the multiobjective transportation problem.
of this region does not affect the optimal basis can 4 1 3 90
4 6 0.5
be determined fro m (35). The values of perturbed 1 4 2 90
optimal basi s perturbed objective values 1 1.5 7
coef ficients and perturbed objective value Demands 60 60 60 Total = 180
can be determined as follows:
Table 2: Initial simplex tableau for the illustrative example.
all
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
= + Ä (3B8a)sic x 11 x 12 x 13 x 21 x 22 x 23 u 1 u 2 u 3 u 4B
u1 1
1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 90
u (2 39) 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 90
= - Ù NB + .Ù NB
u3 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 60
u4 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 60
= + . Ä + Ù B - z(40) -4 -3 -2 -1 -3 -4 0 0 0 0 0

Ä = [ ä 1 ä 2 ….. ä m + n-1 ] t
(41) Table 3: Final optimal simplex tableau for the illustrative example.
all
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ù B = { á i j | ( i, j ) E I }, Ù NB = { á ij | ( i, j ) E J} Basic x 11 x 12 x 13 x 21 x 22 x 23 u 1 u 2 u 3 u4B
(42) x 13 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 -1 -1 60
where, x 22 -1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 -1 0 30
x 21 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 60
1
is a column vector of m+n-1 – dimensional x 12 1 0 0 0 -1 0 -1 1 1 30
- z 3 0 0 0 0 2 -2 -2 1 -1 -360
represents the optimal basis variables in the final
optimal simplex tableau, X = [ x 11 x x x x x ] t
12 13 21 22 23
is a square matrix of m+n-1 dimensional
represents the coefficients of initial basis in the
final optimal simplex tableau,
Ä is a column vector of m+n-1 dimensional
represents the allowable tolerance in the right
hand side constraints perturbations as defined in (45)
the critical region,
is a column vector of m+n-1 dimensional
represents the allowable tolerance in objective The multiobjective transportation problem P(MTP1)
function coefficients perturbations of basis variables, can be transformed into single transportation problem
is a column vector of mn-m-n+1 dimensional P(ëTP1) by using the weighting sum approach as
represents the allowable tolerance in the follows:
objective function coefficients perturbations of non
basic variables and P (ëTP1): Min [ C X ]
is an m+n-1 x mn-m-n+1 matrix represents the subject to:
column coefficients constraints matrix of non A X = B (46)
basis variables in the final optimal simplex
tableau. X, ë 2 0, ë = 1
where,
5. Illustrative Example: Consider the multiobjective
transportation problem P(MTP1) of two sources ( m=2) and t
(47)
ël = [ ë 1 ë 2 ], C = ë , = [1 1]
three destinations ( n=3 ) as follows:
In this example, the weights of the objective
P(MTP1): Min [C ( k ) X, k=1,2] (43)
subject to: functions are chosen by [0.6 0.4] so that the resultant
objective function coefficients C is given by:
A X = B (44)
X20 C = [ 4 3 2 1 34 ] (48)

The data for the multiobjective transportation The results of the original and final optimal
problem is given in Table 1, where, the cell (i, j) in simplex tableau for the example are given in Table 2
the north-west corner gives the c i j ( 1 ) while, the cell and Table 3.
in the south-east corner gives the c ( 2 ). Each
ij row From Tables 2 and 3, the required data for
perturbations are given as follows:
corresponds to a supply point and each column
corresponds to a demand point. The total supply equals the
total demand. I = {x 12 , x13 , x21 , x22 }, J = {x11 , x23 , u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 } (49)

672
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

For simplicity, the decision variables x 11 , x 12, x 13, The critical region of the parameters of the
x 14 , x15 and x16 will be denoted by numbers 1, 2, 3, 4,5 objective functions coefficients and the right hand side
and 6 respectively. While, the decision variables u 1 , u2, constraints perturbations R ä, á, ë, C of the problem
u 3 and u 4 will be denoted by numbers 7, 8, 9 and 10 P(ëTP1) given by (36) and is defined as follows:
respectively. Thus,
R ä, á, ë, C
= { ä, á, ë, C: - ä * s ä s ä *, iE{2,3,4,5}
i
I = { 2, 3, 4, 5 }, J = { 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 } (50) - T * s á j s T *, j E {1,6,7,8,9,10}
(1 - ä ) bi s b is (1 +i ä ) b , i E {2,3,4,5}
(2)i i
(1 - á ) c s ë c (1) + ë c s (1 + á ) c , j E
j j 1 j 2 j j j
{1,6,7,8,9,10}
A Bo = [ A R2 A R3 A R4 A R5 ] =
(1 + ä i ) a i = (1 + ä j) b j

–1
Ao B =[A o B -1 R 2 A o B -1 R 3 A o B -1 R 4 A o B -1R 5 ]=

C o 2= [ c3 c c4 c ]5= [ 3 2 1 3 ]
B
o
C NB = [ c 1 c 6 c 7 c 8 c 9 c 10 ] = [ 4 4 0 0 0 0 ]

Ao NB = [ A o C1 A oC6 A o C7
A o C8 A o C9 A o C10 ] =

(51)

The maximum allowable tolerance for the right

hand side constraints perturbations ä * of the problem
P(ëTP1) given by (37) and can be calculated as
follows:

(52)

Note that, for the balanced condition, the following

perturbed condition must be satisfied:- ä * =0.1429, T * =0.1111, ë 1 , ë 2 20, ë1 + ë2 = 1} (55)

á 1 + á 2 = â 1 + â 2 + â 3 (Balanced perturbed The values of perturbed optimal basis ,

condition) (53)
perturbed objective values coefficients and
perturbed objective value of the problem P(WP1)
are given by (22-24) and can be determined as follows:
The maximum allowable tolerance for the
objective function coefficients perturbations T * of the
problem P(ëTP1) given by (38) and can be calculated
as follows:

(56)
(54)

673
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007

simultaneously and independently from their specified

values while remaining the same solution optimal. The
proposed approach can be considered as an extension
of W endell [12] tolerance approach in a special case of
linear programming and in the case of multiobjective
transportation problem. Also, the proposed approach
can be considered as another tolerance approach of
both Hansen, Labbe and Wendell [18] tolerance approach
in a special case of the transportation problem that
allows changing in both the weights, the objective
(57) functions coefficients and in the right hand side terms
simultaneously and independently from their specified
values while remaining the same solution optimal. The
condition of balanced transportation problem is taken
= 360 + [2 2 -1 1] +[60+ä 1 ä2 -ä3-ä 4 into consideration when dealing with the right hand
side constraints. The proposed approach differs from
their approach in allowing both weighting and objective
functions coefficients to change parametrically
according to maximum certain specified tolerance
intervals while remaining the same solution optimal.
30+ä 2 -ä3 60+ä 3 30-ä2 +ä3 +ä 4 ] (58) The proposed tolerance approach aims at finding the
balanced region of the parameters of both weights of
the objectives, objective functions coefficients and the
right hand side constraints at which any change inside
where, their ranges of this region does not affect the optimal
basis. The proposed tolerance approach uses only the
Ä = [ ä ä ä1 ä ] 2t 3 4 data of initial and final simplex tableau of the
equivalent single linear problem. Formulation of both
Ù B= [á á á2 á ]3 t, 4 5
obtained perturbed solution and the corresponding
= [á á á 1á á 6á ] t7
Ù NB 8 9 10
perturbed objective values are presented. An illustrative
example is presented to clarify the idea of the proposed
Co B = [ 3 2 1 3 ], C o
NB =[440000 ] approach.

REFERENCES

Ao NB = 1. Gallagher, R. and O. Saleh, 1994. “Constructing

(59)
Conclusion: This paper presents the tolerance approach
to sensitivity analysis in multiobjective transportation
problem. The weighted sum approach is used to
convert the multiobjective transportation problem into
single transportation problem. The proposed approach
allows changing in both the weights, objective
functions coefficients and in the right hand side terms
the Set of Efficient Objective Values in Linear
Multiple Objective Transportation Problems ”,
European J. of Operational Research, Vol. 73, pp:
150-163.
2. Wendell, R., 1982. “A Preview of a Tolerance
Approach to Sensitivity Analysis in Linear
Programming”, Discrete Math., Vol. 38, pp: 121-
124.
3. Wendell, R., 1984. “Using Bounds on the Data in
Linear Programming: The Tolerance Approach to
Sensitivity Analysis”, Mathematical Programming,
Vol. 29, pp: 304-322.
4. Gal, T., 1992. “Weakly Redundant Constraints and
Their Impact on Postoptimal Analysis in LP ”, Eur.
J. of Oper. Res., Vol. 60, pp: 315-326.
5. Jansen, B., J. Jong, C. Roos and T. Terlaky, 1997.
“Sensitivity Analysis in Linear Programming: Just
be Carefull ! ”, European J. of Operational
Research, Vol. 101, pp: 15-28.

674
 J. Appl. Sci. Res., 3(8): 668-675, 2007
6. Ward, J. and R. Wendell, 1990. “Approaches to
Sensitivity Analysis in Linear Programming”,
Annals of Operations Res., Vol. 27, pp: 3-38.
7. Saaty, T. and S. Gass, 1954. “The Parametric
Objective Function. Part I ”, Oper. Res., Vol.
2, pp: 316-319.
8. Gal, T., 1979. “Postoptimal Analysis, Parametric
Programming and Related Topics”, McGraw-Hill,
New York,
9. Wendell, R., 1985. “The Tolerance Approach to
Sensitivity Analysis in Linear Programming”,
Management Science, Vol. 31, pp: 564-578.
10. Barnett, S., 1962. “Stability of the Solution to a
Linear Programming Problem”, Oper. Res. Quart.,
Vol. 13, pp: 219-228.
11. Shetty, C., 1959. “Sensitivity Analysis in Linear
Programming”, J. Industrial Engineering, Vol. 10,
pp: 379-386.
12. Saaty, L., 1958. “Coefficient Perturbation of a
Constrained Extremum”, J. Oper. Res. Soc., Vol.
7, pp: 294-302.
675
View publication stats
13. Kim, C., 1971. “Parameterizing an Activity Vector
in Linear Programming”, Oper. Res., Vol.
19, pp: 1632-1646.
14. Ravi, N. and R. Wendell, 1989. “The Tolerance
Approach to Sensitivity Analysis of Matrix
Coefficients in Linear Programming ”, Management
Science, Vol. 35, pp: 1106-1119.
15. Hansen, P., M. Labbe and R. Wendell, 1989.
“Sensitivity Analysis in Multiple Objective Linear
Programming: The Tolerance Approach ”,
European J. of Operational Research, Vol. 38, pp:
63-69.
16. Marmol, A. and J. Puerto, 1997. “Special Cases of
the Tolerance Approach in Multiobjective Linear
Programming ”, European J. of Operational
Research, Vol. 98, pp: 610-616.
17. Lin, C. and U. Wen, 2003. “Sensitivity Analysis of
the Optimal Assignment”, European J. of
Operational Research, Vol. 149, pp: 35-46.