DETERMINING AGGREGATE CRITERIA WEIGHTS FROM CRITERIA RANKINGS BY A GROUP OF DECISION MAKERS

被引:21
作者
Alfares, Hesham K. [1 ]
Duffuaa, Salih O. [1 ]
机构
[1] King Fahd Univ Petr & Minerals, Dept Syst Engn, Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia
关键词
Multi-criteria; decision making/process; group decisions;
D O I
10.1142/S0219622008003174
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
In this paper, we present an empirical methodology to determine aggregate numerical criteria weights from group ordinal ranks of multiple decision criteria. Assuming that such ordinal ranks are obtained from several decision makers, aggregation procedures are proposed to combine individual rank inputs into group criteria weights. In this process, we use previous empirical results for an individual decision maker, in which a simple function provides the weight for each criterion as a function of its rank and the total number of criteria. Using a set of experiments, weight aggregation procedures are proposed and empirically compared for two cases: (i) when all the decision makers rank the same set of criteria, and (ii) when they rank different subsets of criteria. The proposed methodology can be used to determine relative weights for any set of criteria, given only criteria ranks provided by several decision makers.
引用
收藏
页码:769 / 781
页数:13
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   The integration of analytical hierarchy process and data envelopment analysis in a multi-criteria decision-making problem [J].
Ahmad, Norita ;
Berg, Daniel ;
Simons, Gene R. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & DECISION MAKING, 2006, 5 (02) :263-276
[2]   Assigning Cardinal Weights in Multi-Criteria Decision Making Based on Ordinal Ranking [J].
Alfares, Hesham ;
Duffuaa, Salih .
JOURNAL OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS, 2008, 15 (5-6) :125-133
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2002, AIDING DECISIONS MUL
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1999, J MULTI-CRITERIA DEC
[5]  
BARRON FH, 1992, ACTA PSYCHOL, V80, P91
[6]  
BARZILAI J, 1997, J MULTI CRITERIA DEC, V6, P155
[7]   Testing the reliability of weight elicitation methods: Direct rating versus point allocation [J].
Bottomley, PA ;
Doyle, JR ;
Green, RH .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2000, 37 (04) :508-513
[8]   A comparison of three weight elicitation methods: good, better, and best [J].
Bottomley, PA ;
Doyle, JR .
OMEGA-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2001, 29 (06) :553-560
[9]   Judging relative importance: Direct rating and point allocation are not equivalent [J].
Doyle, JR ;
Green, RH ;
Bottomley, PA .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1997, 70 (01) :65-72
[10]   Aggregation of partial ordinal rankings:: an interval goal programming approach [J].
González-Pachón, J ;
Romero, C .
COMPUTERS & OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2001, 28 (08) :827-834