检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]河南大学工商管理学院,开封475000 [2]东北大学系统工程研究所,沈阳110004
出 处:《系统仿真学报》2013年第10期2367-2373,共7页Journal of System Simulation
基 金:国家自然科学基金(70931001;61273203)
摘 要:针对当前分组多属性评标机制,在评标专家有限理性的前提下,存在着评标专家抬分和压分越来越严重、对立情绪累积现象明显和组间评标结果差异越来越大的问题。提出加入综合专家组或增设一对反映标的负相关新指标的策略改进当前评标机制,描述了改进评标机制的原型系统,构建了基于Multi-Agent的分组评标行为仿真构架,在定义各Agent的属性、决策规则和交互协作方式基础上,给出了仿真的具体步骤,定义了相关行为参数,利用Matlab GUI平台实现评标行为仿真分析系统,设定相关参数进行三种机制下的评标模拟与比较,仿真结果表明:改进后的分组评标机制有效地控制了评标结果差异增大,相对合理地调节了评标专家评分标准,提高了评标公平性,体现了改进机制的有效性,为评标决策提供依据。In the practices, the bid attributes usually are classified into two groups, technical attributes and business attributes. Taking bounded rationality as precondition, there would be that raising and pressing grades was increasingly severe, the difference between two groups increasingly and objectiveness worse and worse. So a group of integrative experts were set or some criteria related with two groups of attributes were added to improve current mechanism. Prototype system was described, meanwhile the multi-agent simulation frameworks were structured. After the attributes of each agent, decision rule and the way were defined in which different agents used for exchange and collaboration, the simulation procedure was given specifically. Then the analytical system of bidding evaluation based on Matlab GUI was realized after defining correlation behaviour parameters. The comparison results demonstrate that two improved mechanisms could adjust standard for evaluation reasonably, could control the difference increasing between two groups effectively and improve the fairness of evaluation. It indicates the effectiveness of improved mechanisms.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.16.70.193