Handling Preferences in the "Pre-conflicting" Phase of Decision Making Processes under Multiple Criteria

Multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) literature concentrates on the concept of conflicting objectives, which is related to focusing on the need of trading off. Most approaches to eliciting preferences of the decision maker (DM) are built accordingly on contradistinguishing different attainable levels of objectives. We propose to pay attention to the non-conflicting aspects of decision making allowing the DM to express preferences as a desirable direction of consistent improvement of objectives. We show how such preference information combined with a dominance relation principle results in a Chebyshev-type scalarizing model, which can be used in early stages of decision making processes for deriving preferred solutions without trading off.

[1]  Elena Molho,et al.  The origins of quasi-concavity: a development between mathematics and economics , 2004 .

[2]  A. Wierzbicki On the completeness and constructiveness of parametric characterizations to vector optimization problems , 1986 .

[3]  Dmitry Podkopaev Representing Partial Information on Preferences with the Help of Linear Transformation of Objective Space , 2008 .

[4]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Introduction to Multiobjective Optimization: Interactive Approaches , 2008, Multiobjective Optimization.

[5]  Joel N. Morse,et al.  Organizations: Multiple Agents with Multiple Criteria , 1981 .

[6]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Introduction to Multiobjective Optimization: Noninteractive Approaches , 2008, Multiobjective Optimization.

[7]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  NAUTILUS method: An interactive technique in multiobjective optimization based on the nadir point , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[8]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Improving the computational efficiency in a global formulation (GLIDE) for interactive multiobjective optimization , 2011, Annals of Operations Research.

[9]  Kalyanmoy Deb,et al.  Toward an Estimation of Nadir Objective Vector Using a Hybrid of Evolutionary and Local Search Approaches , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  On scalarizing functions in multiobjective optimization , 2002, OR Spectr..

[11]  W. Michalowski,et al.  Efficient Solutions and Bounds on Tradeoffs , 1997 .

[12]  A. Wierzbicki A Mathematical Basis for Satisficing Decision Making , 1982 .

[13]  Dmitry Podkopaev An approach to finding trade-off solutions by a linear transformation of objective functions , 2007 .

[14]  Ignacy Kaliszewski,et al.  Quantitative Pareto Analysis by Cone Separation Technique , 1994 .

[15]  Kaisa Miettinen,et al.  Nonlinear multiobjective optimization , 1998, International series in operations research and management science.

[16]  P. Rousseeuw,et al.  Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics , 2005 .

[17]  Kim Fung Man,et al.  Multiobjective Optimization , 2011, IEEE Microwave Magazine.

[18]  Marc Despontin,et al.  Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application, Ralph E. Steuer (Ed.). Wiley, Palo Alto, CA (1986) , 1987 .