Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Group Decision and Negotiation

GDN 2019: Group Decision and Negotiation: Behavior, Models, and Support pp 3–16Cite as

Solving Multicriteria Group Decision-Making (MCGDM) Problems Based on Ranking with Partial Information

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 351))

Abstract

This paper presents an interactive Decision Support System for solving multicriteria group decision-making (MCGDM) problems, based on partial information obtained from the decision makers (DMs). The decision support tool was built based on the concept of flexible elicitation of the FITradeoff method, with graphical visualization features and a user-friendly interface. The decision model is based on searching for dominance relations between alternatives, according to the preferential information obtained from the decision-makers from tradeoff questions. A partial (or complete) ranking of the alternatives is built based on these dominance relations, which are obtained from linear programming models. The system shows, at each interaction, an overview of the process, with the partial results for all decision-makers. The visualization of the individual rankings by all DMs can help them to achieve an agreement during the process, since they will be able to see how their preferred alternatives are in the ranking of the other DMs. The applicability of the system is illustrated here with a problem for selecting a package to improve safety of oil tankers.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ahn, B.S., Park, K.S.: Comparing methods for multiattribute decision making with ordinal weights. Comput. Oper. Res. 35, 1660–1670 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2006.09.026

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Athanassopoulos, A.D., Podinovski, V.V.: Dominance and potential optimality in multiple criteria decision analysis with imprecise information. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 48, 142–150 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600345

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Belton, V., Stewart, T.: Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1495-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Danielson, M., Ekenberg, L.: A robustness study of state-of-the-art surrogate weights for MCDM. Group Decis. Negot. 26, 677–691 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-016-9494-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Danielson, M., Ekenberg, L., Larsson, A., Riabacke, M.: Weighting under ambiguous preferences and imprecise differences in a cardinal rank ordering process. Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst. 7, 105–112 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/18756891.2014.853954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. de Almeida, A.T., Cavalcante, C.A.V., Alencar, M.H., Ferreira, R.J.P., Almeida-Filho, A.T., Garcez, T.V.: Multicriteria and multiobjective models for risk, reliability and maintenance decision analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 231. Springer, New York (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17969-8

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. de Almeida, A.T., de Almeida, J.A., Costa, A.P.C.S., de Almeida-Filho, A.T.: A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: flexible and interactive tradeoff. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 250, 179–191 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.08.058

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. de Almeida, A.T., Wachowicz, T.: Preference analysis and decision support in negotiations and group decisions. Group Decis. Negot. 26, 649–652 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-017-9538-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dias, L.C., Clı́maco, J.N.: Dealing with imprecise information in group multicriteria decisions: a methodology and a GDSS architecture. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 160, 291–307 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2003.09.002

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Dias, L.C., Clímaco, J.N.: Additive aggregation with variable interdependent parameters: the VIP analysis software. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 51, 1070–1082 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601012

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Edwards, W., Barron, F.H.: SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 60, 306–325 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1994.1087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T., Cabral, A.P.C.S.: Using data visualization for ranking alternatives with partial information and interactive tradeoff elicitation. Oper. Res. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00444-2

  13. Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decision Analysis with Multiple Conflicting Objectives. Wiley, New York (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kirkwood, C.W., Corner, J.L.: The effectiveness of partial information about attribute weights for ranking alternatives in multiattribute decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 54, 456–476 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1993.1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kirkwood, C.W., Sarin, R.K.: Ranking with partial information: a method and an application. Oper. Res. 33, 38–48 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.33.1.38

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Malakooti, B.: Ranking and screening multiple criteria alternatives with partial information and use of ordinal and cardinal strength of preferences. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. 30, 355–368 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.844359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mármol, A.M., Puerto, J., Fernández, F.R.: Sequential incorporation of imprecise information in multiple criteria decision processes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 137, 123–133 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0377-2217(01)00082-0

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Montiel, L.V., Bickel, J.E.: A generalized sampling approach for multilinear utility functions given partial preference information. Decis. Anal. 11, 147–170 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2014.0296

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Mustajoki, J., Hämäläinen, R.P., Salo, A.: Decision support by interval SMART/SWING - incorporating imprecision in the SMART and SWING methods. Decis. Sci. 36, 317–339 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5414.2005.00075.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Park, K.S.: Mathematical programming models for characterizing dominance and potential optimality when multicriteria alternative values and weights are simultaneously incomplete. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. 34, 601–614 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmca.2004.832828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Park, K.S., Kim, S.H.: Tools for interactive multiattribute decision-making with incompletely identified information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 98, 111–123 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(95)00121-2

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  22. Salo, A.A., Hämäläinen, R.P.: Preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements. Oper. Res. 40, 1053–1061 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.40.6.1053

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Salo, A.A., Hämälainen, R.P.: Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. 31, 533–545 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.983411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Salo, A.A., Punkka, A.: Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 163, 338–356 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2003.10.014

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Sarabando, P., Dias, L.C.: Simple procedures of choice in multicriteria problems without precise information about the alternatives’ values. Comput. Oper. Res. 37, 2239–2247 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2010.03.014

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Sarabando, P., Dias, L.C.: Multiattribute choice with ordinal information: a comparison of different decision rules. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A: Syst. Hum. 39, 545–554 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmca.2009.2014555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stillwell, W.G., Seaver, D.A., Edwards, W.: A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 28, 62–77 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(81)90015-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ulvila, J.W., Snider, W.D.: Negotiation of international oil tanker standards: an application of multiattribute value theory. Oper. Res. 28, 81–96 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.28.1.81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Weber, M.: Decision making with incomplete information. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 28, 44–57 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(87)90168-8

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Roselli, L.R.P., de Almeida, A.T., Frej, E.A.: Decision neuroscience for improving data visualization of decision support in the FITradeoff method. Oper. Res. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-018-00445-1

  31. Roselli, L.R.P., Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T.: Neuroscience experiment for graphical visualization in the FITradeoff Decision Support System. In: Chen, Y., Kersten, G., Vetschera, R., Xu, H. (eds.) GDN 2018. LNBIP, vol. 315, pp. 56–69. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92874-6_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are most grateful for CNPq and CAPES, for the financial support provided.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CDSID - Center for Decision Systems and Information Development, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco – UFPE, Av. Acadêmico Hélio Ramos, s/n – Cidade Universitária, Recife, PE, 50740-530, Brazil

    Eduarda Asfora Frej, Adiel Teixeira de Almeida & Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli

Authors
  1. Eduarda Asfora Frej
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduarda Asfora Frej .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CDSID - Center for Decision Systems and Information Development, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, Brazil

    Danielle Costa Morais

  2. Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK

    Ashley Carreras

  3. CDSID - Center for Decision Systems and Information Development, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, Brazil

    Adiel Teixeira de Almeida

  4. University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Rudolf Vetschera

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Frej, E.A., de Almeida, A.T., Roselli, L.R.P. (2019). Solving Multicriteria Group Decision-Making (MCGDM) Problems Based on Ranking with Partial Information. In: Morais, D., Carreras, A., de Almeida, A., Vetschera, R. (eds) Group Decision and Negotiation: Behavior, Models, and Support. GDN 2019. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 351. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21711-2_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21711-2_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-21710-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-21711-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation