![]() Derouiche, Imen ![]() ![]() in Annals of Operations Research (2021), 297 This paper examines the effect of risk disclosure on firm operational efficiency using a unique database of nonfinancial, and non-utility French firms belonging to the SBF 120 index over the period ... [more ▼] This paper examines the effect of risk disclosure on firm operational efficiency using a unique database of nonfinancial, and non-utility French firms belonging to the SBF 120 index over the period 2007–2015. In a first step, we use a data envelopment analysis output-oriented variable returns to scale model to determine firm operational efficiency scores based on one output (i.e., sales revenue) and three inputs (i.e., net property, plant, and equipment; cost of goods sold; and selling, general, and administrative costs). These scores are used in a second step to estimate the effect of risk disclosure on operational efficiency after controlling for a set of other factors. The empirical results show a statistically significant positive relation between risk disclosure and operational efficiency, suggesting that firms tend to be relatively more efficient when they disclose more about their risk exposure. Overall, we provide evidence that firms with greater risk disclosure are seen by stakeholders as more credible and trustworthy, leading them to conduct better transactions and, consequently, to improve their operational efficiency. This result is consistent with the notion that stakeholders perceive transparent firms positively, particularly those revealing bad news. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 183 (23 UL)![]() ; Toro Pozo, Jorge Luis ![]() in Annals of Operations Research (2016) In this article we introduce a new multiobjective optimizer based on a recently proposed metaheuristic algorithm named Variable Mesh Optimization (VMO). Our proposal (multiobjective VMO, MOVMO) combines ... [more ▼] In this article we introduce a new multiobjective optimizer based on a recently proposed metaheuristic algorithm named Variable Mesh Optimization (VMO). Our proposal (multiobjective VMO, MOVMO) combines typical concepts from the multiobjective optimization arena such as Pareto dominance, density estimation and external archive storage. MOVMO also features a crossover operator between local and global optima as well as dynamic population replacement. We evaluated MOVMO using a suite of four wellknown benchmark function families, and against seven state-of-the-art optimizers: NSGA-II, SPEA2,MOCell, AbYSS,SMPSO,MOEA/DandMOEA/D.DRA. The statistically validated results across the additive epsilon, spread and hypervolume quality indicators confirm that MOVMO is indeed a competitive and effective method for multiobjective optimization of numerical spaces. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 149 (1 UL)![]() Arts, Joachim ![]() in Annals of Operations Research (2013), 224(1), 77-100 Detailed reference viewed: 111 (3 UL)![]() ![]() ; van der Torre, Leon ![]() in Annals of Operations Research (2008), 163(1), 89114 As systems dealing with preferences become more sophisticated, it becomes essential to deal with various kinds of preference statements and their interaction. We introduce a non-monotonic logic ... [more ▼] As systems dealing with preferences become more sophisticated, it becomes essential to deal with various kinds of preference statements and their interaction. We introduce a non-monotonic logic distinguishing sixteen kinds of preferences, ranging from strict to loose and from careful to opportunistic, and two kinds of ways to deal with uncertainty, either optimistically or pessimistically. The classification of the various kinds of preferences is inspired by a hypothetical agent comparing the two alternatives of a preference statement. The optimistic and pessimistic way of dealing with uncertainty correspond on the one hand to considering either the best or the worst states in the comparison of the two alternatives of a preference statement, and on the other hand to the calculation of least or most specific “distinguished” preference orders from a set of preference statements. We show that each way to calculate distinguished preference orders is compatible with eight kinds of preferences, in the sense that it calculates a unique distinguished preference order for a set of such preference statements, and we provide efficient algorithms that calculate these unique distinguished preference orders. In general, optimistic kinds of preferences are compatible with optimism in calculating distinguished preference orders, and pessimistic kinds of preferences are compatible with pessimism in calculating distinguished preference orders. However, these two sets of eight kinds of preferences are not exclusive, such that some kinds of preferences can be used in both ways to calculate distinguished preference orders, and other kinds of preferences cannot be used in either of them. We also consider the merging of optimistically and pessimistically constructed distinguished preferences orders. [less ▲] Detailed reference viewed: 101 (0 UL) |
||