跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.82.149) 您好!臺灣時間:2023/06/09 22:53
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:萬家慶
研究生(外文):Chia-Chin Wan
論文名稱:模糊多評準決策應用於研發聯盟發展策略評估之研究–以我國中小企業為例-
論文名稱(外文):Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making for Evaluating the Performance of Research and development Consortia Developing Strategies in Taiwan Small and medium Enterprises
指導教授:謝龍發謝龍發引用關係
指導教授(外文):Lung-Far Hsieh
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:中原大學
系所名稱:企業管理研究所
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:104
中文關鍵詞:研發聯盟層級分析法模糊多評準決策中小企業
外文關鍵詞:Medium & Small EnterprisesR&D consortiaFuzzyAnalysis Hierarchy Process
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:35
  • 點閱點閱:271
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:35
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:5
中小企業在我國產業結構中佔有高達98%的比例,由於資金的缺乏、人力資源和組織規模的不足,值此經濟環境已朝全球化發展及台灣加入世界貿易組織之際,已面臨更嚴峻的競爭環境。全球化的競爭條件講求的就是速度與規模,中小企業應積極進行策略性的研發聯盟,以有效互補與統合企業間彼此資源、加速人才交流運用,透過合作,共同開發所需要的技術能力,擴大研發之綜效,進而提升產業競爭力。然而推動推動研發聯盟牽涉數家企業在加入聯盟之策略規劃、聯盟夥伴選擇、聯盟介面管理、法令規範及政府措施等層面問題,因此如何有效並成功推動研發聯盟運作成為重要課題。
本研究從學術研究角度,透過文獻整理、問卷調查分析,整合政府、專家學者及產業不同群體意見,建立了一套客觀、週延及整體性的中小企業研發聯盟評估準則層級架構,共五大構面及二十項評估準則。並針對該三個群體計二十六位受訪者進行問卷調查,藉由層級分析法( AHP),求得不同群體對於評估準則權重值,瞭解其進行研發聯盟評估所考慮項目重要程度。並結合模糊多評準決策法(FMCDM),導出政府推動研發聯盟策略方案綜合效用值並予以排序,進行我國中小企業研發聯盟發展策略之評估。研究結果發現:
一、中小企業進行研發聯盟的主要考慮層面為企業策略規劃、聯盟夥伴選擇、聯盟介面管理等三項,次要考慮層面則為法令規範、政府措施等兩項。
二、互信程度、資源互補、產出分配公平性及競爭合作關係等四項,是中小企業進行研發聯盟主要考慮之重點(評估準則),且具有相當共識度。
三、面對全球化競爭及科技快速進步的環境,中小企業在透過聯盟方式互補有無,分擔研發投資風險及面臨跨公司聯盟型態運作之際,應加強對「溝通機制與制度」、「分散風險」等兩項評估準則之重視程度。
四、不同的產業類別對於評估準則會有不同考量。而不同的研發計畫標的,也會因研發計畫之創新程度、技術複雜程度、前瞻性、不確定性、研發時程長短、投資金額大小及參與聯盟成員屬性等因素,對於評估準則會有不同重視程度。
五、「研擬研發聯盟專法,設立研發法人機構,健全研發聯盟法制」、「由研究機構推動及協調整合聯盟參與者」、「協助產業建立研發管理及成果歸屬、運用方式之共同契約版本」、「提供多元化優惠誘因制度」及「政府協尋合作夥伴並媒合聯盟」等五項策略應積極推動,將有利於研發聯盟之發展。
While entering WTO, Taiwan has become one of the members in the international community of globalization. The medium & small enterprises, which accounts for 98 % of Taiwan industry are facing even more competition due to insufficient capital, <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=human resources&v=56">human resources</a>, and limited organization scale. To achieve competitive edges for the globalization requires efficiency in doing <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=business&v=56">business</a> and scale in industry development; meanwhile, medium & small enterprises should aggressively form a strategic R&D consortia so as to effectively consolidate resources to jointly develop technical capabilities to multiply the synergy, improving industry competitiveness in the end. Formation of the strategic R&D consortia , however, involves various aspects of issues such as strategic planning, making choice of partners, consortia interface <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=management&v=56">management</a>, <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=government&v=56">government</a> policies and regulations, etc. How to effectively promote the R&D consortia has thus become an important subject for further study.
From the angle of academic research, this study has established an objective, sound, and overall system for evaluating R&D consortia through papers and documents gathering, questionnaires survey and analysis, and collecting expertise and viewpoints from <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=Government&v=56">Government</a> officials, specialists, scholars, and industrialists. As a result, it comes up with five levels of structure and twenty evaluating principles for forming R&D consortia. Furthermore, the survey was conducted on twenty-six interviewers, covering three categories, which are <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=government&v=56">government</a>, <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=school&v=56">school</a>, and the industry. Analysis Hierarchy Process (AHP) was applied to determine the weighted values of various samples and then to understand the importance of every consideration in conducting the R&D consortia evaluation. Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making(FMCDM) was also utilized to work out the effectiveness of each strategic course of action and sort them out to evaluate the R&D consortia strategy tailored for the Medium & Small Enterprises of Taiwan. The findings of this study is summarized as follows:
1.In pursuit of R&D consortia and evaluation, the major consideration for Medium & Small Enterprises goes to three categories, i.e., company strategic planning, selection of partners, and <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=management&v=56">management</a> of alliance interface. And then, secondary consideration goes to <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=government&v=56">government</a> policies and regulations.
2.In pursuit of R&D consortia, the key points of consideration for Medium & Small Enterprises comprises four categories, i.e. mutual <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=trust&v=56">trust</a>, mutual support of resources, equalization of <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=business&v=56">business</a> outcome, and the collaboratively competitive relationship, in which certain extent of consensus can be reached.
3.While seeking for forming the alliance to consolidate resources and sharing risks in the midst of global competition and technology revolution, the Medium and Small Enterprises have to put more emphasis on two evaluating principles- “ Communications Mechanism and System” and “ Risk Sharing”.
4.There should be different evaluating principles for different industrial sectors. Similarly, Considering different goals of R&D planning in terms of levels of innovation, technical complex, foresightedness, uncertainty, project duration, <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=investment&v=56">investment</a> amount, and attribute of alliance members, there should also be varied extent of emphasis for evaluating principles.
5.To facilitate the development of R&D consortia, the following are five strategies requiring be actively promoted:
-To draft R&D alliance related regulations, set up R&D organization, and ensure the development of a sound R&D alliance system.
-To have study groups taking lead to promote R&D activities and coordinate members of alliance.
-To help the industry draw out the general terms & conditions of contract in governing R&D <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=management&v=56">management</a>, outcome sharing, and methods of application.
-To provide multiform privilege and incentive systems.
-To make <a href="http://www.ntsearch.com/search.php?q=government&v=56">government</a> assist the industry in finding suitable partners
目錄
中文摘要------------------------------------------------------------------- I
英文摘要------------------------------------------------------------------ II
誌 謝 辭-------------------------------------------------------------------IV
目 錄------------------------------------------------------------------- V
圖 目 錄-----------------------------------------------------------------VIII
表 目 錄------------------------------------------------------------------ IX
第一章 緒論---------------------------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 研究背景----------------------------------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究動機與目的----------------------------------------------------- 2
第三節 研究流程----------------------------------------------------------- 4
第四節 章節結構----------------------------------------------------------- 5
第二章 文獻探討------------------------------------------------------------ 6
第一節 中小企業的定義----------------------------------------------------- 6
第二節 研發聯盟的定義與類型----------------------------------------------- 7
第三節 研發聯盟的目的與潛在動機------------------------------------------ 12
第四節 研發聯盟面臨的問題------------------------------------------------ 14
第五節 研發聯盟的關鍵成敗因素-------------------------------------------- 22
第六節 我國研發聯盟發展策略---------------------------------------------- 26
第三章 研究方法----------------------------------------------------------- 29
第一節 層級分析法------------------------------------------------------- 30
第二節 建立層級架構----------------------------------------------------- 33
第三節 評估準則權重的決定----------------------------------------------- 34
第四節 共識度(變異係數)分析------------------------------------------- 37
第五節 模糊理論--------------------------------------------------------- 37
第六節 模糊多評準決策--------------------------------------------------- 40
第七節 資料分析工具----------------------------------------------------- 42
第八節 問卷設計--------------------------------------------------------- 43
第九節 研究對象與資料蒐集----------------------------------------------- 44
第四章 研究結果---------------------------------------------------------- 45
第一節 受訪者基本資料分析----------------------------------------------- 45
第二節 中小企業研發聯盟評估準則權重之決定------------------------------- 47
第三節 中小企業研發聯盟受訪者共識度分析--------------------------------- 52
第四節 中小企業研發聯盟策略方案績效之評估------------------------------- 55
第五章 結論與建議-------------------------------------------------------- 58
第一節 研究結論與發現---------------------------------------------------- 58
第二節 理論與實務的涵意-------------------------------------------------- 60
第三節 研究限制---------------------------------------------------------- 61
第四節 後續研究建議------------------------------------------------------ 61
參考文獻-------------------------------------------------------------------- 62
附錄一:我國中小企業研發聯盟發展考量(評估準則)問卷---------------------- 68
附錄二:我國中小企業研發聯盟發展策略問卷調查表---------------------------- 71
附錄三:受訪者共識度(變異係數)統計表------------------------------------ 79
附錄四:各項策略方案對應於各評估準則之模糊績效評估值---------------------- 85
附錄五:受訪者對於各方案於各評估準則之績效評估值-------------------------- 93
























圖目錄
1. 圖1-3-1 研究流程圖------------------------------------------------------------ 4
2. 圖3-1-1 AHP法流程圖------------------------------------------------------- 32
3. 圖3-2-1 評估模型之階層體系----------------------------------------------- 33
4. 圖3-5-1 三角模糊函數之隸屬函數----------------------------------------- 38
5. 圖3-5-2 五等級語意變數之隸屬函數圖----------------------------------- 39


表目錄
1.表2-2-1 研發聯盟定義彙整----------------------------------------------------- 7
2.表2-3-1 企業參與研發聯盟之動機與目的彙整---------------------------- 13
3.表2-4-1 Lei(1993)競爭-合作的雙重角色-------------------------------- 19
4.表2-4-2 企業參與研發聯盟面臨的問題------------------------------------- 21
5.表2-5-1 研發聯盟成敗因素彙整---------------------------------------------- 25
6.表3-3-1 AHP方法要素間評估尺度說明------------------------------------ 34
7.表4-1-1 評估準則問卷受訪專家統計表------------------------------------- 45
8.表4-1-2 評估準則權重及策略方案績效表現值問卷發放及回收統計- 46
9.表4-2-1 受訪者對於各成對比較矩陣之C.I.值----------------------------- 47
10.表4-2-2 中小企業研發聯盟評估因素之權重表---------------------------- 48
11.表4-2-3 主要考慮層面之權重表---------------------------------------------- 49
12.表4-2-4 評估準則之權重表---------------------------------------------------- 50
13.表4-3-1受訪者共識度(變異係數)統計表-------------------------------- 52
14.表4-4-1各群體對各方案之模糊綜合效用BNP值統計表---------------- 55
參考文獻
中文部份
王健全,「產業特性對研發策略聯盟之影響」,台灣經濟研究月刊,1992年5月,頁32-35。
王明妤、袁建中,「國際策略聯盟成效的影響因素分析-以新竹科學園區為例」,科技管理研討會,1992年。
方世杰,「國內廠商參與科技專案計畫動機之研究」,中華民國經濟部經濟情事暨評論季刊,第四卷第三期,民八十七年十一月。
司徒達賢、陳隆麒、洪順慶,「中小企業互助合作與企業整合之研究與輔導-以電子業與機械業為例」,經濟部中小企業處,民八十一年六月。
朱文儀,「高科技產業從事共同研究發展之實證探討-以資訊電子業為例」,國立台灣大學商學研究所碩士論文,民八十年六月。
李勝祥,「聯盟夥伴認知對運作結果及合作意願之影響」,成功大學企業管理研究所博士論文,1998年。
行政院,「知識經濟發展方案具體執行計畫總說明」,民九十年元月十七日,頁1-18。
何雍慶,「促進中小企業共同研究發展」,經濟部中小企業處,民七十九年六月。
林茂山,「中小企業合作經營的特質與發展策略」,台灣經濟研究月刊第十五卷第五期,民八十一年五月,頁50。
柯博瑜,「聯盟資源與企業特性對國際策略聯盟類型選擇之影響」,暨南大學國企所未出版碩士論文,民八十六年。
徐木蘭、朱文儀,「產業聯盟管理面的挑戰-從國內企業共同研發談起」,台灣經濟研究月刊第十五卷第五期,民八十一年年五月,頁42-43。
耿筠,「策略聯盟初探及實例說明」,勤益學報13期,民八十五年二月,頁193-213。
黃慧嫻、李素華,「科技事業技術移轉涉及之租稅法制」,科技法律透析月刊,民九十一年九月,頁48-49。
陳正男、李勝祥,「聯盟夥伴認知與動機對績效與未來承諾之影響」,台大管理論叢,1997年9月,8(2),頁125-164。
曾國雄、邱華凱,「模糊決策系統」,模糊理論及其應用,全華科技圖書,民九十二年元月,頁11-1至11-6。
經濟部,「民國九十一年中小企業白皮書」,民九十一年,頁129-134。
經濟部,「民國九十二年中小企業白皮書」,民九十二年,頁376-379。
經濟部,「企業研發聯盟推動計畫先期研究」,民九十年。
經濟部,「企業研發聯盟推動計畫專案計畫九十二年度執行成果報告」,民九十二年。
經濟部,「2003年產業技術白皮書」,民九十二年九月,頁411-420。
楊益昇,「企業進行合作研發之智慧財產權問題淺析」,科技法律透析月刊,民九十一年五月。
楊益昇,「企業研發合作協議法律面研析」,科技法律透析月刊,民九十一年八月,頁15-19、民九十一年九月頁15-18。
張盈盈,「台灣中小企業技術取得模式之研究」,銘傳大學國企所未出版碩士論文,民八十九年六月,頁15。
蔡敦浩,「國際企業策略性結盟與科技移轉-開發中國家的觀點」,1991年產業科技研究發展管理研討會,民八十一年。
謝龍發,「我國商參與政府主導共同研究發展聯盟的動機、類型和管理機制的相關研究」,政治大學企業管理研究所未出版博士論文,民國八十二年六月,頁17。
謝龍發,「科技管理」,國立空中大學,民八十六年,頁374-375。
賴士葆、謝龍發,「研發聯盟中廠商採取同步工程管理機制之效能研究」,產業科技研究發展管理研討會。
鄧振源、曾國雄,「層級分析法(AHP)的內涵特性與應用」,中國統計學報二十七卷六期、七期,民七十八年六月、七月,頁5-22、頁1-20。
鄧振源,「計畫評估-方法與應用」,民九十一年,頁155-156。

英文部份
Bellman, R.E. and Zadeh, L.A., (1970), “Decision Making in a Fuzzy Environment,” Management Science, 17(4), pp.141-146.
Bruce, M.L., Leverick, F. and Wilson, D., (1995), “Success of Factor Collaboration Produce Development: A Study of Supplier of Information Communication, Technology,” R&D Management, 25(1), pp.33-34.
Buckley, J.J., (1984), “The multiple judge, multiple criteria ranking problem: A fuzzy set approach,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 13(1), pp.25-37.
Buckley, J.J., (1985), “Ranking alternatives using fuzzy numbers”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 15(1), pp.21-31.
Capon, N. and Glazer, R., (1987), “Marketing and Technology: A Strategic Colignment”, Journal of Marketing, pp.51-
Dinneen, G..P., (1988), “R&D Consortia:Are they Working?”, Research and Development, pp.62-66.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., (1978), “Operations on Fuzzy Number” International Journal of Systems Science, l(9), pp.613-629.
Dubois, D. and Prade, H., (1980), “Fuzzy Set and System: Theory and Application”, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, N.Y. Academic Press.
Ernst, D. and Bleeke, J., (1993), “Collaborating to Compete: Using Strategic Alliances and Acquisitions in the Global Marketplace,” New York: Wiley.
Evan, W. and Olk, P., (1990), “R&D Consortia—A new U.S. Organizational Form,” Sloan Management Review, pp.37-46.
French, S., (1984), “Fuzzy decision analysis: Some criticisms,” TIMS/Studies in the Management Sciences, 20, pp.29-44.
Gardner, M.P., (1985), “Creating a Corporate Culture for the Eighties,” Business Horizons, pp.59-63.
Gemunden, H.G., Heydebreck, P. and Herden, R., (1992), “Technological interweavement: a means of achieving innovation success,” R&D Management, 22(4), pp.359-375.
Gerlach, M., (1988), “Alliances and the Social Organization of Japanese Business,” Unpublished book manuscript, University of California at Berkeley.
Grimm, S.K, Wally, C.S. and Young, G., (1996), “Strategic Group and Rivalries Firm Behavior: Toward A Reconciliation,” Strategic Management Journal, 18(1), pp.149-157.
Hagedoorn, J., (2001), “Inter-Firm R&D Partnership-An Overview of Major Trends and Patterns Since 1960,” National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Studies, Strategic Research Partnerships: Proceedings from an NSF Workshop, NSF01-336, Project Officers, John E. Jankowski, Albert N. Link, Nicholas S. Vonortas, Arlington.
Harrigan, K.R., (1988), “Strategic Alliances and Partner Asymmetries,” Strategies in International Business, New York: Lexingion Books, pp.205-226.
Hoffmann, W.H. and Schlosser, R., (2001), “Success Factor of Strategic Alliances in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises-An Empirical Survey,” Long Range Planning, 34(3), pp.357-381.
Hofstede, G.., (1980), “Motivation, Leadership and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad,” Organizational Dynamics, pp.42-63.
Jao, I.Y., (1997), “The Interaction-Learning Effects in Cross-Border Manufacturing Alliances,” The First International Management Conference, National Chi-Nan University, Puli, Taiwan.
Kanter, R.M., (1990), “When Giants Learn Cooperative Strategies,” Planning Review, January-February, pp.15-22.
Kumar, N., Scheer, L.K. and Steenkamp, J.E.M., (1995), “The Effects of Perceived Interdependence on Dealer Attitudes,” Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), pp.348-356.
Laarhoven, P.J.M. and Pedrycz, W., (1983), “A Fuzzy Extension of Satty’s Priority Theory,” Fuzzy Set and Systems, 11(2), pp.229-241.
Lee, M.K. and Lee, M.K., (1992), “High Technology Consortia: A Panacea for America’s Technological Competitiveness Problems ?” High Technology Law Journal, 6(2), pp.335-362.
Lei, D., (1993), “Offensive and Defensive Use of Alliances,” Long Range Planning, 26(4), pp.32-41.
Lewis, J.D., (1992), “The New Power of Strategic Alliances,” Planning Review, 20(5), pp.45-46.
Mandell, M., (1990), “The Consortium: An Idea Whose Time Has Come(or Gone)?” Across The Board, pp.30-35.
McAllister, D.J., (1995), “Affect and Cognition-based Trust as Foundations for International Cooperation in Organizations,” Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), pp.24-59.
Medcof, J.W., (1997), “Why Too Many Alliance End in Divorce” Long Range Planning, 30(5), pp.718-732.
Mody, A., (1992), “Staying in the Loop:International Alliances for Sharing Technology,” World Bank Discussion Papers, pp.1-16.
Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D., (1994), “The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, 58(1), pp.20-38.
Morris, D. and Hergert, M., (1987), “Trends in International Collaborative Agreements,” Columbia Journal of World Business, pp.15-27.
Mowery, D.C., (1998), “Collaborative R&D: How Effect Is It ?” Science and Technology.
Niosi, J. and Bergeron, M., (1992), “Technical alliances in the Canadian electronics industry,” in Khalil and Bayraktar(eds.) Management of Technology III, The Key to Global Competitiveness, Institute of Industrial Engineers and Management Press:Norcross.
Nojiri, H., (1980), “On the fuzzy team decision in a change environment,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 30(1), pp.137-150.
Opricovis, S. and Tzeng, G.H., (2003), “Defuzzification for a Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision Model,” International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-based Systems, 11(5), pp.635-652.
Ouchi, W.G. and Bolton, M.K., (1988), “The logic of joint research and development,” California Management Review, 30(3), pp.9-33.
Parker B. and Zeira, Y., (1996), “Parent Company Characteristics and International Joint Ventures Success in England and the U.S.A” Creating and Managing International Joint Ventures, Edited by Woodside A.G. and Pitts R.E., London: Quorum Books.
Parkhe, A., (1993), “Strategic Alliance Structuring: A Game Theoretic and Transaction Cost Examination of Interfirm Cooperation,” Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), pp.794-829.
Porter, M.E. and Fuller, M.B.,(1986), “Coalition and Global Strategy-Competition in Global Industries,” Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts, pp.322-325.
Porter, M.E., “The Competitive Advantage Of Nations,” Harvard Business Review, pp.73-93.
Satty, T.L., (1977), “A Scaling Method For Priorities in Hierarchical Structures”, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(2), pp.234-281.
Satty, T.L., (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, New York, McGraw-Hill
Simpson, J.T. and Mayo, D.T., (1997), “Relationship Management: A Call for Fewer Influence Attempts?” Journal of Business Research, 39(2), pp.209-218.
Smilor, R. and Gibson, D., (1991), “Accelerating technology transfer in R&D consortia,” Research Technology Management,vol.35,no.1, pp.44-49
Smith,J. Brock, “Selling Alliances,” International Marketing Management, 26(2), pp.149-161.
Souder, W.E. and Nassar, S., (1990), “Choosing an R&D Consortium” Research Technology Management, pp.35-41.
Souder, W.E. and Nassar, S., (1990), “Managing R&D Consortia for Success,” Research Technology Management, pp.44-50.
Teece, D., (1990), “Strategic Alliances and Technological Innovation: An Organizational Perspective,” Working Paper, Walter A. Haas School of Business, University of California at Berkeley.
Veugelers, R., (1995), “Internal R&D expenditures and external technology sourcing,” Research Policy, 26(3), pp.1-25.
Vinod, K., (1995), “The role of R&D consortia in technology development,” Occasional Paper, 3, pp.7-27.
Werner, J. and Bermer, J., (1991), “Hard lesson in cooperative research,” Issues in Science and Technology, pp.44-49.
White, L.J., (1985), “Clearing the Legal Path to Cooperative Research,” Technology Review, pp.39-41.
Williamson, O.E., (1983), “Credible Commitment: Using Hostages to Support Exchange,” American Economic Review,73(4), pp.519-539.
Wolf, M.F., (1994), “Building Trust in Alliances,” Research Technology Management, pp.12-15.
Yuan, B. and Wang M.Y., (1995), “The Influential Factors for the Effectiveness of International Strategic Alliances of High-Tech Industry in Taiwan,” International Journal of Technology Management, 10(7/8), pp.777-787.
Zadeh, L.A., (1965), “Fuzzy Set,” Information and Control, 8(3), pp.338-353.
Zadeh, L.A., (1975), “The Concept of a Lingustic Variable and its Application to Approximate Reasoning,” Information Science, 8(1), pp.199-249; 8(2), pp.301-357; 9(3), pp.43-80.
Zhao, R. and Gorvind, R., (1991), “Algebraic Characteristics of Extend Fuzzy Number”, Information Science, 54(1), pp.103-130.
Zimmermann, H.J., (1978), “Fuzzy Programming and Linear Programming with several objective functions,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(1), pp.45-55.
電子全文 電子全文(本篇電子全文限研究生所屬學校校內系統及IP範圍內開放)
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top