IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/halshs-00187184.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The representation of conditional relative importance between criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Christophe Labreuche

    (Thales Research and Technology [Palaiseau] - THALES [France])

  • Michel Grabisch

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

We study in this paper the notion of conditional relative importance in a quantitative framework. Bi-capacities are shown to be suitable to represent such notion. We restrict ourself to the case when the relative importance of two criteria are conditional on a third being attractive or repulsive. We give two algorithms that enable to construct the neutral level from the preference relation.

Suggested Citation

  • Christophe Labreuche & Michel Grabisch, 2007. "The representation of conditional relative importance between criteria," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00187184, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:halshs-00187184
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-007-0184-2
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00187184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00187184/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-007-0184-2?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2016. "Fuzzy Measures and Integrals in MCDA," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Salvatore Greco & Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira (ed.), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 553-603, Springer.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Christophe Labreuche & Michel Grabisch, 2003. "The Choquet integral for the aggregation of interval scales in multicriteria decision making," Post-Print hal-00272090, HAL.
    4. Joost M.E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2000. "Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(10), pages 1337-1348, October.
    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. Labreuche, Christophe & Grabisch, Michel, 2018. "Using multiple reference levels in Multi-Criteria Decision aid: The Generalized-Additive Independence model and the Choquet integral approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 598-611.
    2. Christophe Labreuche, 2018. "An axiomatization of the Choquet integral in the context of multiple criteria decision making without any commensurability assumption," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 701-735, December.
    3. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2010. "A decade of application of the Choquet and Sugeno integrals in multi-criteria decision aid," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 247-286, March.
    4. Hung Nguyen & Uyen Pham & Hien Tran, 2012. "On some claims related to Choquet integral risk measures," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 5-31, May.
    5. Hunt, Brian J. & Wiecek, Margaret M. & Hughes, Colleen S., 2010. "Relative importance of criteria in multiobjective programming: A cone-based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(2), pages 936-945, December.

    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. Luca Anzilli & Silvio Giove, 2020. "Multi-criteria and medical diagnosis for application to health insurance systems: a general approach through non-additive measures," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 559-582, December.
    2. Grabisch, Michel & Kojadinovic, Ivan & Meyer, Patrick, 2008. "A review of methods for capacity identification in Choquet integral based multi-attribute utility theory: Applications of the Kappalab R package," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 766-785, April.
    3. Schunk, Daniel, 2009. "Behavioral heterogeneity in dynamic search situations: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1719-1738, September.
    4. Ronald Bosman & Frans Van Winden, 2010. "Global Risk, Investment and Emotions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(307), pages 451-471, July.
    5. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2009. "A characterization of the 2-additive Choquet integral through cardinal information," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00445132, HAL.
    6. Joost M. E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2003. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1251-1263, September.
    7. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2014. "Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1149-1159, June.
    8. Yitong Wang & Tianjun Feng & L. Keller, 2013. "A further exploration of the uncertainty effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 291-310, December.
    9. Mayag, Brice & Bouyssou, Denis, 2020. "Necessary and possible interaction between criteria in a 2-additive Choquet integral model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 308-320.
    10. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Paya, Ivan & Peel, David A., 2021. "On the contribution of the Markowitz model of utility to explain risky choice in experimental research," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 527-543.
    11. Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2002. "The symmetric and asymmetric Choquet integrals on finite spaces for decision making," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 37-52, January.
    12. Brice Mayag & Michel Grabisch & Christophe Labreuche, 2011. "A representation of preferences by the Choquet integral with respect to a 2-additive capacity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 297-324, September.
    13. Christophe Labreuche, 2018. "An axiomatization of the Choquet integral in the context of multiple criteria decision making without any commensurability assumption," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 701-735, December.
    14. Michel Grabisch & Salvatore Greco & Marc Pirlot, 2008. "Bipolar and bivariate models in multi-criteria decision analysis: descriptive and constructive approaches," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00340374, HAL.
    15. Jason R.V. Franken & Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2014. "Measuring the effect of risk attitude on marketing behavior," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(5), pages 525-535, September.
    16. Haruyoshi Ito & Jing Ai & Akihiko Ozawa, 2016. "Managing Weather Risks: The Case of J. League Soccer Teams in Japan," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(4), pages 877-912, December.
    17. Pennings, Joost M.E. & Garcia, Philip, 2004. "Strategic Risk Management Behavior: What Can Utility Functions Tell Us?," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20388, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Csanaky, András & Ulbert, József, 2004. "Kockázatészlelés és kockázati magatartás [Risk testing and risk behaviour]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 235-258.
    19. Mohammad Ghaderi & Milosz Kadzinsky, 2019. "Accounting for structural patterns in construction of value functions: a convex optimization approach," Economics Working Papers 1634, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    20. Jason R.V. Franken & Joost M.E. Pennings & Philip Garcia, 2017. "Risk attitudes and the structure of decision†making: evidence from the Illinois hog industry," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 41-50, January.

    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:hal:cesptp:halshs-00187184. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.