Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Determining Multiple Attribute Weights Consistent with Pairwise Preference Orders

  • Conference paper
Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2005 (ICCSA 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 3483))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper presents a method for determining multiple attribute weights when pairwise comparison judgments on alternatives are specified and attribute consequences are captured in imprecise ways. A decision-maker or expert can express holistic pairwise comparisons on alternatives from his/her domain knowledge and decision alternatives are characterized by some tangible or possibly some intangible multiple attributes of which consequences can be represented by imprecise information. In this paper, attribute weights are to be estimated in the direction of minimizing the amount of violations and thus to be as consistent as possible with a decision-maker’s ordered pairs. Multiple attribute weights that were determined with pairwise judgments on a subset of alternatives can be used to prioritize the other remaining alternatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Borcherding, K., von Winterfeldt, D.: The effect of varying value trees on multiattribute evaluations. Acta Psychologica 68, 153–170 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Shoemaker, P.J.H., Waid, C.D.: An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models. Management Sci. 28, 182–196 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Stillwell, W.G., Seaver, D.A., Edwards, W.: A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Org. Behav. Hum. Proc. 28, 62–77 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barron, F.H., Barrett, B.E.: Decision quality using ranked attribute weights. Management Sci. 42, 1515–1523 (1996)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Srinivasan, V., Shocker, A.D.: Linear programming techniques for multidimensional analysis of preferences. Psychometrika 38, 337–369 (1973)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Horsky, D., Rao, M.R.: Estimation of attribute weights from preference comparisons. Management Sci. 30, 801–822 (1984)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Pekelman, D., Sen, S.K.: Mathematical programming models for the determination of attributes weights. Management Sci 20, 1217–1229 (1974)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Jacquet-Lagreze, E., Siskos, J.: Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making, the UTA method. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 10, 151–164 (1982)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. White, C.C., Sage, A.P., Dozono, S.: A model of multiattribute decisionmaking and trade-off weight determination under uncertainty. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 14, 223–229 (1984)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Zopounidis, C., Dimitras, A.I.: Multicriteria Decision Aid Methods for the Prediction of Business Failure. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Weber, M.: Decision making with incomplete information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 28, 44–57 (1987)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Sage, A.P., White, C.C.: ARIADNE: A Knowledge-based interactive system for planning and decision support. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 14, 35–47 (1984)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. Park, K.S., Kim, S.H.: Tools for interactive multiattribute decision making with incompletely identified information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 98, 111–123 (1997)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Ahn, B.S., Park, K.S., Han, C.H., Kim, J.K.: Multi-attribute decision aid under hierarchical structure and incomplete information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 125, 431–439 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Mustafi, C.K., Xavier, M.J.: Mixed-integer linear programming formulation of a multi-attribute threshold model of choice. J. Opl Res Soc. 36, 935–942 (1985)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Oral, M., Kettani, O.: Modelling the process of multiattribute choice. J. Opl. Res. Soc. 40, 281–291 (1989)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Saaty, T.L.: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Jacquet-Lagreze, E., Siskos, Y.: Invited Review: Preference disaggregation: 20 years of MCDA experience. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 130, 233–245 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Administration, Hansung University, 389 Samsun 3, Sungbuk, Seoul, 136-792, Korea

    Byeong Seok Ahn

  2. Department of Business Administration, Hanyang University, 1271 Sa-1, Sangrok, Ansan, Gyeonggi, 426-791, Korea

    Chang Hee Han

Authors
  1. Byeong Seok Ahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chang Hee Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Perugia, via Vanvitelli, 1, I-06123, Perugia, Italy

    Osvaldo Gervasi

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive N.W., T2N 1N4, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Marina L. Gavrilova

  3. William Norris Professor, Head of the Computer Science and Engineering Department, University of Minnesota, USA

    Vipin Kumar

  4. Department of Chemistry, University of Perugia, Via Elce di Sotto, 8, I-06123, Perugia, Italy

    Antonio Laganá

  5. Institute of High Performance Computing, IHCP, 1 Science Park Road, 01-01 The Capricorn, Singapore Science Park II, 117528, Singapore

    Heow Pueh Lee

  6. School of Computing, Soongsil University, Seoul, Korea

    Youngsong Mun

  7. Clayton School of IT, Monash University, 3800, Clayton, Australia

    David Taniar

  8. OptimaNumerics Ltd, Belfast, United Kingdom

    Chih Jeng Kenneth Tan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ahn, B.S., Han, C.H. (2005). Determining Multiple Attribute Weights Consistent with Pairwise Preference Orders. In: Gervasi, O., et al. Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2005. ICCSA 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3483. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11424925_39

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11424925_39

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-25863-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32309-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation