Dominance measuring methods within MAVT/MAUT with imprecise information concerning decision-makers' preferences

Dominance measuring methods are an approach for dealing with complex decision-making problems with imprecise information within multi-attribute value/utility theory. These methods are based on the computation of pairwise dominance values and exploit the information in the dominance matrix in different ways to derive measures of dominance intensity and rank the alternatives under consideration. In this paper we review dominance measuring methods proposed in the literature for dealing with imprecise information (intervals, ordinal information or fuzzy numbers) about decision-makers' preferences and their performance in comparison with other existing approaches, like SMAA and SMAA-II or Sarabando and Dias' method.

[1]  W. Marsden.  I and J , 2012 .

[2]  Risto Lahdelma,et al.  SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making , 2001, Oper. Res..

[3]  Lucien Duckstein,et al.  Comparison of fuzzy numbers using a fuzzy distance measure , 2002, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[4]  David Ríos Insua,et al.  Sensitivity analysis in multi-objective decision making , 1990 .

[5]  A. Mateos,et al.  Dominance intensity measure within fuzzy weight oriented MAUT: An application , 2013 .

[7]  Bruce E. Barrett,et al.  Decision quality using ranked attribute weights , 1996 .

[8]  T. Stewart.  Robustness of Additive Value Function Methods in MCDM , 1996 .

[9]  Alfonso Mateos,et al.  A new dominance intensity method to deal with ordinal information about a DM's preferences within MAVT , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[10]  R. L. Winkler,et al.  Statistics : Probability, Inference and Decision , 1975 .

[11]  Luis C. Dias,et al.  Multiattribute Choice With Ordinal Information: A Comparison of Different Decision Rules , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[12]  Luis C. Dias,et al.  Simple procedures of choice in multicriteria problems without precise information about the alternatives' values , 2010, Comput. Oper. Res..

[13]  Jacques L. Koko,et al.  The Art and Science of Negotiation , 2009 .

[14]  Alfonso Mateos,et al.  Dominance, potential optimality and alternative ranking in imprecise multi-attribute decision making , 2007, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[15]  A. Mateos,et al.  Dominance Measuring Method Performance under Incomplete Information about Weights , 2012 .

[16]  D. A. Seaver,et al.  A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making , 1981 .

[17]  Antonio Jiménez Martín,et al.  Preference intensity in MCDM when an additive utility function represents DM preferences , 2012 .

[18]  Antonio Jiménez-Martín,et al.  Ranking Methods Based on Dominance Measures Accounting for Imprecision , 2009, ADT.

[19]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  Preference ratios in multiattribute evaluation (PRIME)-elicitation and decision procedures under incomplete information , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[20]  Simon French,et al.  A FRAMEWORK FOR SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS IN DISCRETE MULTI OBJECTIVE DECISION MAKING , 1991 .

[21]  Martin Weber.  Decision Making with Incomplete Information , 1987 .

[22]  Risto Lahdelma,et al.  SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis , 1998, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[23]  Byeong Seok Ahn,et al.  Comparing methods for multiattribute decision making with ordinal weights , 2008, Comput. Oper. Res..

[24]  Antonio Jiménez-Martín,et al.  Dominance intensity measuring methods in MCDM with ordinal relations regarding weights , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[25]  Antonio Jiménez Martín,et al.  Ranking Alternatives on the Basis of a Dominance Intensity Measure , 2010 .

[26]  Aguayo Garcia,et al.  Dominance intensity methods for ranking of alternatives in mcdm with imprecise information , 2014 .

[27]  J. Puertoa,et al.  Decision criteria with partial information , 2000 .