Imperial College London
Alternate

Professor Nilay Shah OBE FREng

Faculty of Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering

Professor of Process Systems Engineering
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 6621n.shah

 
 
//

Assistant

 

Miss Jessica Baldock +44 (0)20 7594 5699

 
//

Location

 

ACEX 522ACE ExtensionSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Jing:2019:10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.023,
author = {Jing, R and Wang, M and Zhang, Z and Liu, J and Liang, H and Meng, C and Shah, N and Li, N and Zhao, Y},
doi = {10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.023},
journal = {Energy and Buildings},
pages = {123--139},
title = {Comparative study of posteriori decision-making methods when designing building integrated energy systems with multi-objectives},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.023},
volume = {194},
year = {2019}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - By multi-objective optimization of designing integrated energy systems for buildings, the Pareto frontier can be obtained consisting of a series of optimal compromise solutions. Since all solutions on Pareto frontiers are non-dominated, it is challenging to identify one “best of the best” solution, which requires posteriori multi-criteria decision-making. However, most existing research only presented the obtained Pareto frontiers, while neglected the decision-making. Therefore, this paper compares four posteriori decision-making approaches in recent publications by solving one identical problem to emphasize the importance of decision-making. An illustrative Pareto frontier is generated by two multi-objective optimization approaches, i.e., eps ()-constraint and Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II). Four categories of multi-criteria decision-making methods, i.e., Shannon entropy, Eulerian distance, fuzzy membership function and evidential reasoning, are further implemented. The decision-making results are different when various approaches are applied. The underlying reasons are analyzed including two key factors, i.e. selection of objectives and shape of Pareto frontier, which provides suggestions of using decision-making approaches in future multi-objective optimization research on building energy systems.
AU  - Jing,R
AU  - Wang,M
AU  - Zhang,Z
AU  - Liu,J
AU  - Liang,H
AU  - Meng,C
AU  - Shah,N
AU  - Li,N
AU  - Zhao,Y
DO  - 10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.023
EP  - 139
PY  - 2019///
SN  - 0378-7788
SP  - 123
TI  - Comparative study of posteriori decision-making methods when designing building integrated energy systems with multi-objectives
T2  - Energy and Buildings
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2019.04.023
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/69943
VL  - 194
ER  -
Download