Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking

被引:176
作者
Cook, WD [1 ]
机构
[1] York Univ, Schulich Sch Business, Dept Management Sci, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
ranking; ordinal preferences; distance; consensus; correlation; voters; power indices;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejor.2005.03.048
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
This paper examines the problem of aggregating ordinal preferences on a set of alternatives into a consensus. This problem has been the subject of study for more than two centuries and many procedures have been developed to create a compromise or consensus. We examine a variety of structures for preference specification, and in each case review the related models for deriving a consensus. Two classes of consensus models are discussed, namely ad hoc methods, evolving primarily from parliamentary settings over the past 200 years, and distance or axiomatic-based methods. We demonstrate the levels of complexity of the various distance-based models by presenting the related mathematical programming formulations for them. We also present conditions for equivalence, that is, for yielding the same consensus ranking for some of the methods. Finally, we discuss various extensions of the basic ordinal ranking structures, paying specific attention to partial ranking, voting member weighted consensus, ranking with intensity of preference, and rank correlation methods, as alternative approaches to deriving a consensus. Suggestions for future research directions are given. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:369 / 385
页数:17
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   ON THE MINIMUM VIOLATIONS RANKING OF A TOURNAMENT [J].
ALI, I ;
COOK, WD ;
KRESS, M .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1986, 32 (06) :660-672
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1955, RANK CORRELATION MET
[3]   PRIORITY RANKING AND CONSENSUS FORMATION - THE CASE OF TIES [J].
ARMSTRONG, RD ;
COOK, WD ;
SEIFORD, LM .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 1982, 28 (06) :638-645
[4]  
BLIN JM, 1976, REV FR AUTOMAT INFOR, V10, P21
[5]   PREFERENCE STRUCTURES .1. DISTANCES BETWEEN TRANSITIVE PREFERENCE RELATIONS [J].
BOGART, KP .
JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICAL SOCIOLOGY, 1973, 3 (01) :49-67
[6]   PREFERENCE STRUCTURES .2. DISTANCES BETWEEN ASYMMETRIC RELATIONS [J].
BOGART, KP .
SIAM JOURNAL ON APPLIED MATHEMATICS, 1975, 29 (02) :254-262
[7]  
Borda J., 1981, MEMOIRE ELECTIONS SC
[8]   Analyzing ordinal data for group representation [J].
Chang, WCW ;
Chu, PY ;
Ding, CG ;
Wu, SS .
GROUP DECISION AND NEGOTIATION, 2000, 9 (01) :47-61
[9]  
Condorcet M. J, 1785, ESSAI APPL ANAL PROB
[10]  
Cook W.D., 1978, MANAGE SCI, V24, P1721, DOI DOI 10.1287/MNSC.24.16.1721