IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v2y2005i2p110-123.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Preference Programming Approach to Make the Even Swaps Method Even Easier

Author

Listed:
  • Jyri Mustajoki

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, P.O. Box 1100, FIN-02015 HUT, Finland)

  • Raimo P. Hämäläinen

    (Systems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology, P.O. Box 1100, FIN-02015 HUT, Finland)

Abstract

This paper introduces an approach to support different phases of the even swaps process by preference programming, which is a framework for modeling incomplete information within multiattribute value theory (MAVT). In the approach, the even swaps process is carried out as usual, but in parallel, the evolution of the preferences of the decision maker is modeled with preference programming. With this model, we can provide information to the even swaps process to help identify practically dominated alternatives, and to find applicable candidate attributes for the next even swap. The approach does not compromise the original idea of an easy-to-use process. Our Smart-Swaps web software is used to demonstrate the method in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Jyri Mustajoki & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 2005. "A Preference Programming Approach to Make the Even Swaps Method Even Easier," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 110-123, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:2:y:2005:i:2:p:110-123
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.1050.0043
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1050.0043
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.1050.0043?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Gordon B. Hazen, 1986. "Partial Information, Dominance, and Potential Optimality in Multiattribute Utility Theory," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 296-310, April.
    3. Weber, Martin, 1987. "Decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 44-57, January.
    4. John Butler & Douglas J. Morrice & Peter W. Mullarkey, 2001. "A Multiple Attribute Utility Theory Approach to Ranking and Selection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(6), pages 800-816, June.
    5. Gregory, Robin & Wellman, Katharine, 2001. "Bringing stakeholder values into environmental policy choices: a community-based estuary case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 37-52, October.
    6. Ralph L. Keeney, 2002. "Common Mistakes in Making Value Trade-Offs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 935-945, December.
    7. Katrin Borcherding & Thomas Eppel & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1991. "Comparison of Weighting Judgments in Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(12), pages 1603-1619, December.
    8. Arbel, Ami, 1989. "Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 317-326, December.
    9. Kirkwood, Craig W. & Corner, James L., 1993. "The Effectiveness of Partial Information about Attribute Weights for Ranking Alternatives in Multiattribute Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 456-476, April.
    10. Salo, Ahti A. & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 1995. "Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 458-475, May.
    11. Ahti A. Salo & Raimo P. Hämäläinen, 1992. "Preference Assessment by Imprecise Ratio Statements," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(6), pages 1053-1061, December.
    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. L. Robin Keller & Ali Abbas & Manel Baucells & Vicki M. Bier & David Budescu & John C. Butler & Philippe Delquié & Jason R. W. Merrick & Ahti Salo & George Wu, 2010. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 327-330, December.
      • L. Robin Keller & Manel Baucells & Kevin F. McCardle & Gregory S. Parnell & Ahti Salo, 2007. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(4), pages 173-175, December.
      • L. Robin Keller & Manel Baucells & John C. Butler & Philippe Delquié & Jason R. W. Merrick & Gregory S. Parnell & Ahti Salo, 2008. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 173-176, December.
      • L. Robin Keller & Manel Baucells & John C. Butler & Philippe Delquié & Jason R. W. Merrick & Gregory S. Parnell & Ahti Salo, 2009. "From the Editors ..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 199-201, December.
    2. van Valkenhoef, Gert & Tervonen, Tommi, 2016. "Entropy-optimal weight constraint elicitation with additive multi-attribute utility models," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Lahtinen, Tuomas J. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Jenytin, Cosmo, 2020. "On preference elicitation processes which mitigate the accumulation of biases in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(1), pages 201-210.
    4. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    5. Pape, Tom, 2017. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: concept, measures and application," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Mats Danielson & Love Ekenberg, 2016. "The CAR Method for Using Preference Strength in Multi-criteria Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 775-797, July.

    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. Liesio, Juuso & Mild, Pekka & Salo, Ahti, 2007. "Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1488-1505, September.
    2. Tom Pape, 2020. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: Concept, measures and application," Papers 2012.13816, arXiv.org.
    3. de Almeida, Jonatas Araujo & Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas & de Almeida-Filho, Adiel Teixeira, 2016. "A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: Flexible and interactive tradeoffAuthor-Name: de Almeida, Adiel Teixeira," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 179-191.
    4. Salo, Ahti & Punkka, Antti, 2005. "Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 338-356, June.
    5. Pape, Tom, 2017. "Value of agreement in decision analysis: concept, measures and application," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68682, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Salo, Ahti A., 1995. "Interactive decision aiding for group decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 134-149, July.
    7. Kim, Soung Hie & Han, Chang Hee, 2000. "Establishing dominance between alternatives with incomplete information in a hierarchically structured attribute tree," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 79-90, April.
    8. Sam Park, Kyung & Sang Lee, Kyung & Seong Eum, Yun & Park, Kwangtae, 2001. "Extended methods for identifying dominance and potential optimality in multi-criteria analysis with imprecise information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(3), pages 557-563, November.
    9. K S Park & I Jeong, 2011. "How to treat strict preference information in multicriteria decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 62(10), pages 1771-1783, October.
    10. Mattila, V. & Virtanen, K., 2015. "Ranking and selection for multiple performance measures using incomplete preference information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(2), pages 568-579.
    11. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    12. Mustajoki, Jyri & Hamalainen, Raimo P. & Lindstedt, Mats R.K., 2006. "Using intervals for global sensitivity and worst-case analyses in multiattribute value trees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(1), pages 278-292, October.
    13. Juho Kokkala & Kimmo Berg & Kai Virtanen & Jirka Poropudas, 2019. "Rationalizable strategies in games with incomplete preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 185-204, March.
    14. Luis V. Montiel & J. Eric Bickel, 2014. "A Generalized Sampling Approach for Multilinear Utility Functions Given Partial Preference Information," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 147-170, September.
    15. Eduarda Asfora Frej & Danielle Costa Morais & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida, 2022. "Negotiation Support Through Interactive Dominance Relationship Specification," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 591-620, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Vetschera, Rudolf, 1996. "Multi-criteria agency theory," Discussion Papers, Series I 280, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    18. Harju, Mikko & Liesiö, Juuso & Virtanen, Kai, 2019. "Spatial multi-attribute decision analysis: Axiomatic foundations and incomplete preference information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 167-181.
    19. Eduarda Asfora Frej & Adiel Teixeira Almeida & Ana Paula Cabral Seixas Costa, 2019. "Using data visualization for ranking alternatives with partial information and interactive tradeoff elicitation," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 909-931, December.
    20. Mustajoki, Jyri, 2012. "Effects of imprecise weighting in hierarchical preference programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 193-201.

    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:inm:ordeca:v:2:y:2005:i:2:p:110-123. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.