Abstract
AbstractIn multi-criteria decision making, the importance of decision criteria (decision attributes) plays a crucial role. Ranking is a useful technique for expressing the importance of decision criteria in a decision-makers’ preference system. Since weights are commonly utilized for characterizing the importance of criteria, weight determination and assessment are important tasks in multi-criteria decision making and in voting systems as well. In this study, we concentrate on the connection between the preference order of decision criteria and the decision weights. Here, we present an easy-to-use procedure that can be used to produce a sequence of weights corresponding to a decision-makers’ preference order of decision criteria. The proposed method does not require pairwise comparisons, which is an advantageous property especially in cases where the number of criteria is large. This method is based on the application of a class of regular increasing monotone quantifiers, which we refer to as the class of weighting generator functions. We will show that the derivatives of these functions can be used for approximating the criteria weights. Also, we will demonstrate that using weighting generator functions, weights can be inverted in a consistent way. We will deduce the generators for arithmetic and geometric weight sequences, and we will present a one-parameter generator function known as the tau function in continuous-valued logic. We will show that using these weighting generator functions, the weight learning task can be turned into a simple, one-parameter optimization problem.
Funder
National Research, Development and Innovation Fund
Eötvös Loránd University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference78 articles.
1. Abdullah, M.M.B., Islam, R.: Nominal group technique and its applications in managing quality in higher education. Pak. J. Comm. Social Sci. (PJCSS) 5(1), 81–99 (2011)
2. Akram, M., Ilyas, F., Garg, H.: ELECTRE-II method for group decision-making in Pythagorean fuzzy environment. Appl. Intell. 51(12), 8701–8719 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02200-0
3. Allen, R., Thanassoulis, E.: Improving envelopment in data envelopment analysis. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 154(2), 363–379 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00175-9
4. de Almeida, A.T., de Almeida, J.A., Costa, A.P.C.S., et al.: A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: flexible and interactive tradeoff. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 250(1), 179–191 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.058
5. Arbel, A.: Approximate articulation of preference and priority derivation. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 43(3), 317–326 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(89)90231-2
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献