1,720,975 research outputs found
Out of the mist--towards decision-maker-friendly multiple criteria decision making support
No full textRankings revisited
No full textWe argue that rankings, as they are commonly used, can be, and perhaps are, misleading and potentially harmful.With little extra effort, however, one can gain much more insight into relations among the objects ranked and, in the consequence, gain a better understanding of the ranking. The fundamental notion used to compare and evaluate rankings in our analysis is that of Pareto optymality. General claims are illustrated with the ranking of Polish universities published by Perspektywy monthly in 2016.This note is based on results that are well known in the areas of multiobjective optimization and multiple-criteria decision analysis. The objective of the note is to point to the shortcomings and potential pitfalls behind the common use and understanding of rankings
Weight versus reference point multiple criteria decision making methods – analogies and differences, Journal of Telecommunications and Information Technology, 2003, nr 3
Get PDFIn this work we shall be concerned with interactive multiple criteria decision making methods. We show how on the technical level the class of reference point methods can be reduced to the class of weight methods. Though methods from these two classes represent two different interactive decision making paradigms, the equivalence observed opens a way for a joint implementation of a pair of methods each representing a different class. This would establish a firm ground for systematic comparison of both classes of methods as well as for hybrid schemes mixing decisional tools specific for each class
Convex cones, assessment functions, balanced attributes
Get PDFWe investigate a class of polyhedral convex cones, with (the
nonegative orthant in ) as a special case. We start with the
observation that for convex cones contained in , the respective
cone efficiency is inconsistent with the Pareto efficiency, the latter being
deeply rooted in economics, the decision theory, and the multiobjective
optimization theory. Despite that, we argue that convex cones contained in
and the respective cone efficiency are also relevant to these
domains.
To demonstrate this, we interpret polyhedral convex cones of the investigated
class in terms of assessment functions, i.e., functions that aggregate multiple
numerical attributes into single numbers.
Further, we observe that all assessment functions in the current use share
the same limitation; that is, they do not take explicitly into account
attribute proportionality. In consequence, the issue of {\em attribute balance}
(meaning {\it the balance of attribute values}) escapes them. In contrast,
assessment functions defined by polyhedral convex cones of the investigated
class, contained in , enforce the attribute balance. However,
enforcing the attribute balance is, in general, inconsistent with the
well-established paradigm of Pareto efficiency. We give a practical example
where such inconsistency is meaningful.Comment: 28 pages, 13 figures, 1 table, 34 reference
Erratum to "Out of the mist--Towards decision-maker-friendly multiple criteria decision making support" [Eur. J. Oper. Res. 158 (2004) 293-307]
No full text
On non-Pareto efficiency
No full textWe investigate assessment functions, i.e., functions that aggregate numerical attribute values into single numbers. All assessment functions in the current use share the same limitation: they do not explicitly account for the attribute values balance. Here, we present assessment functions that provide for that. However, those functions are at odds with the well-established paradigm of Pareto efficiency. As an example, the relevance of assessment functions to rankings is discussed
Dynamic parametric bounds on efficient outcomes in interactive multiple criteria decision making problems
No full text
- …
