IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v191y2008i2p416-436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions

Author

Listed:
  • Greco, Salvatore
  • Mousseau, Vincent
  • Slowinski, Roman

Abstract

We present a new method, called UTAGMS, for multiple criteria ranking of alternatives from set A using a set of additive value functions which result from an ordinal regression. The preference information provided by the decision maker is a set of pairwise comparisons on a subset of alternatives ARÂ [subset, double equals]Â A, called reference alternatives. The preference model built via ordinal regression is the set of all additive value functions compatible with the preference information. Using this model, one can define two relations in the set A: the necessary weak preference relation which holds for any two alternatives a, b from set A if and only if for all compatible value functions a is preferred to b, and the possible weak preference relation which holds for this pair if and only if for at least one compatible value function a is preferred to b. These relations establish a necessary and a possible ranking of alternatives from A, being, respectively, a partial preorder and a strongly complete relation. The UTAGMS method is intended to be used interactively, with an increasing subset AR and a progressive statement of pairwise comparisons. When no preference information is provided, the necessary weak preference relation is a weak dominance relation, and the possible weak preference relation is a complete relation. Every new pairwise comparison of reference alternatives, for which the dominance relation does not hold, is enriching the necessary relation and it is impoverishing the possible relation, so that they converge with the growth of the preference information. Distinguishing necessary and possible consequences of preference information on the complete set of actions, UTAGMS answers questions of robustness analysis. Moreover, the method can support the decision maker when his/her preference statements cannot be represented in terms of an additive value function. The method is illustrated by an example solved using the UTAGMS software. Some extensions of the method are also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Greco, Salvatore & Mousseau, Vincent & Slowinski, Roman, 2008. "Ordinal regression revisited: Multiple criteria ranking using a set of additive value functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 191(2), pages 416-436, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:191:y:2008:i:2:p:416-436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377-2217(07)00875-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacquet-Lagreze, E. & Siskos, J., 1982. "Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 151-164, June.
    2. Craig W. Kirkwood & Rakesh K. Sarin, 1985. "Ranking with Partial Information: A Method and an Application," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 38-48, February.
    3. Lahdelma, Risto & Hokkanen, Joonas & Salminen, Pekka, 1998. "SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 137-143, April.
    4. JosÉ Figueira & Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrogott, 2005. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-23081-8, December.
    5. V. Srinivasan & Allan Shocker, 1973. "Estimating the weights for multiple attributes in a composite criterion using pairwise judgments," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(4), pages 473-493, December.
    6. James G. March, 1978. "Bounded Rationality, Ambiguity, and the Engineering of Choice," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 587-608, Autumn.
    7. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 2001. "Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 1-47, February.
    8. Mousseau, Vincent & Figueira, Jose & Dias, Luis & Gomes da Silva, Carlos & Climaco, Joao, 2003. "Resolving inconsistencies among constraints on the parameters of an MCDA model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 147(1), pages 72-93, May.
    9. Koksalan, Murat & Ulu, Canan, 2003. "An interactive approach for placing alternatives in preference classes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(2), pages 429-439, January.
    10. Thomas L. Saaty, 2005. "The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 345-405, Springer.
    11. Salvatore Greco & Benedetto Matarazzo & Roman Słowinński, 2005. "Decision Rule Approach," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, chapter 0, pages 507-555, Springer.
    12. Siskos, J., 1982. "A way to deal with fuzzy preferences in multi-criteria decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 314-324, July.
    13. M. Weber, 1985. "A Method of Multiattribute Decision Making with Incomplete Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(11), pages 1365-1371, November.
    14. Dov Pekelman & Subrata K. Sen, 1974. "Mathematical Programming Models for the Determination of Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(8), pages 1217-1229, April.
    15. L C Dias & J N Clímaco, 2000. "Additive aggregation with variable interdependent parameters: the VIP analysis software," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 51(9), pages 1070-1082, September.
    16. Murat Koksalan, M. & Taner, Orhan V., 1992. "An approach for finding the most preferred alternative in the presence of multiple criteria," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 52-60, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2009. "Building a set of additive value functions representing a reference preorder and intensities of preference: GRIP method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(2), pages 460-486, June.
    2. Angilella, Silvia & Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto, 2010. "Non-additive robust ordinal regression: A multiple criteria decision model based on the Choquet integral," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(1), pages 277-288, February.
    3. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2009. "Multicriteria sorting using a valued indifference relation under a preference disaggregation paradigm," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 602-609, October.
    4. Kadziński, Miłosz & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2021. "Active learning strategies for interactive elicitation of assignment examples for threshold-based multiple criteria sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(2), pages 658-680.
    5. Piotr Zielniewicz, 2017. "A Ranking Method Based on the Aggregate Distance Measure Function in the Value Space," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(03), pages 685-710, May.
    6. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2015. "Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis for the Choquet integral preference model and the scale construction problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 172-182.
    7. Doumpos, Michael & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2011. "Preference disaggregation and statistical learning for multicriteria decision support: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(3), pages 203-214, March.
    8. Vetschera, Rudolf, 2017. "Deriving rankings from incomplete preference information: A comparison of different approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(1), pages 244-253.
    9. Vetschera, Rudolf & Chen, Ye & Hipel, Keith W. & Marc Kilgour, D., 2010. "Robustness and information levels in case-based multiple criteria sorting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 841-852, May.
    10. Costa, Ana Sara & Figueira, José Rui & Borbinha, José, 2018. "A multiple criteria nominal classification method based on the concepts of similarity and dissimilarity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(1), pages 193-209.
    11. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    12. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    13. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    14. Arcidiacono, Sally Giuseppe & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore, 2021. "Robust stochastic sorting with interacting criteria hierarchically structured," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 735-754.
    15. Hatami-Marbini, Adel & Tavana, Madjid, 2011. "An extension of the Electre I method for group decision-making under a fuzzy environment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 373-386, August.
    16. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, I: The case of two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 217-245, April.
    17. Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2013. "Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process with ELECTRE and PROMETHEE," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 820-846.
    18. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    19. Silvia Angilella & Marta Bottero & Salvatore Corrente & Valentina Ferretti & Salvatore Greco & Isabella M. Lami, 2016. "Non Additive Robust Ordinal Regression for urban and territorial planning: an application for siting an urban waste landfill," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 427-456, October.
    20. Angilella, Silvia & Corrente, Salvatore & Greco, Salvatore & Słowiński, Roman, 2016. "Robust Ordinal Regression and Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis in multiple criteria hierarchy process for the Choquet integral preference model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 154-169.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:191:y:2008:i:2:p:416-436. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.