IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v249y2016i1p209-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new proposal for fusing individual preference orderings by rank-ordered agents: A generalization of the Yager's algorithm

Author

Listed:
  • Franceschini, Fiorenzo
  • Maisano, Domenico
  • Mastrogiacomo, Luca

Abstract

The problem of the aggregation of multi-agents preference orderings has received considerable attention in the scientific literature, because of its importance for different fields of research. Yager (2001) proposed an algorithm for addressing this problem when the agents’ importance is expressed through a rank-ordering, instead of a set of weights. The algorithm by Yager is simple and automatable but is subject to some constraints, which may limit its range of application: (i) preference orderings should not include incomparable and/or omitted alternatives, and (ii) the fused ordering may sometimes not reflect the majority of the multi-agent preference orderings.

Suggested Citation

  • Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico & Mastrogiacomo, Luca, 2016. "A new proposal for fusing individual preference orderings by rank-ordered agents: A generalization of the Yager's algorithm," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(1), pages 209-223.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:249:y:2016:i:1:p:209-223
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221715007596
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.022?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    2. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhu, Joe, 2003. "Efficiency evaluation with strong ordinal input and output measures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(3), pages 477-485, May.
    5. Fiorenzo Franceschini & Maurizio Galetto & Domenico Maisano, 2007. "Management by Measurement," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73212-9, November.
    6. Cook, Wade D., 2006. "Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(2), pages 369-385, July.
    7. Kenneth J. Arrow & Herve Raynaud, 1986. "Social Choice and Multicriterion Decision-Making," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511754, December.
    8. Lepelley, Dominique & Martin, Mathieu, 2001. "Condorcet's paradox for weak preference orderings," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 163-177, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Akshay Chowdu & Peter Nesbitt & Andrea Brickey & Alexandra M. Newman, 2022. "Operations Research in Underground Mine Planning: A Review," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 109-132, March.
    2. F. Franceschini & D. Maisano, 2020. "Adapting Thurstone’s Law of Comparative Judgment to fuse preference orderings in manufacturing applications," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 387-402, February.

    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. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    2. Han, Weibin & van Deemen, Adrian, 2021. "The solution of generalized stable sets and its refinement," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 60-67.
    3. Azzini, Ivano & Munda, Giuseppe, 2020. "A new approach for identifying the Kemeny median ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 388-401.
    4. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 337-354, December.
    5. Gamboa, Gonzalo & Munda, Giuseppe, 2007. "The problem of windfarm location: A social multi-criteria evaluation framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1564-1583, March.
    6. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    7. Lamboray, Claude, 2009. "A characterization of the prudent order preference function," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 389-405, May.
    8. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Intensity of preference and related uncertainty in non-compensatory aggregation rules," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 649-669, October.
    9. Chakhar, Salem & Ishizaka, Alessio & Labib, Ashraf & Saad, Inès, 2016. "Dominance-based rough set approach for group decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 206-224.
    10. Constantin Zopounidis & Michael Doumpos, 2013. "Multicriteria decision systems for financial problems," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 21(2), pages 241-261, July.
    11. Cem Iskender Aydin & Gokhan Ozertan & Begum Ozkaynak, 2011. "Should Turkey Adopt GM Crops? A Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for the Case of Cotton Farming in Turkey," Working Papers 2011/07, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    12. Giuseppe Munda & Daniela Russi, 2008. "Social Multicriteria Evaluation of Conflict over Rural Electrification and Solar Energy in Spain," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(4), pages 712-727, August.
    13. Li, Yan-Lai & Tang, Jia-Fu & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Jiang, Yu-Shi & Han, Yi & Pu, Yun, 2011. "Estimating the final priority ratings of engineering characteristics in mature-period product improvement by MDBA and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 575-586, June.
    14. Corrente, Salvatore & Figueira, José Rui & Greco, Salvatore, 2014. "The SMAA-PROMETHEE method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(2), pages 514-522.
    15. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Kaveh Madani & Laura Read & Laleh Shalikarian, 2014. "Voting Under Uncertainty: A Stochastic Framework for Analyzing Group Decision Making Problems," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(7), pages 1839-1856, May.
    17. Kadziński, MiŁosz & Greco, Salvatore & SŁowiński, Roman, 2012. "Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 488-501.
    18. Ellen H.M. Moors & Rogier Donders, 2009. "Understanding consumer needs and preferences in new product development: the case of functional food innovations," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-03, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2009.
    19. Haurant, P. & Oberti, P. & Muselli, M., 2011. "Multicriteria selection aiding related to photovoltaic plants on farming fields on Corsica island: A real case study using the ELECTRE outranking framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 676-688, February.
    20. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.

    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:249:y:2016:i:1:p:209-223. 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.