基于银行集的订货:多准则决策的几种新的评分方法

Scott Moser
{"title":"基于银行集的订货:多准则决策的几种新的评分方法","authors":"Scott Moser","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1987299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces new methods for ranking alternatives in multi-criteria decision making situations. Each is based on the normative position that the strength of an alternative is inversely related to the number of alternatives that could prevent it from being chosen. The scores discriminate among elements of the Banks set [Banks, 85]. The new scoring methods are compared to traditional scoring methods and related to the amount of intransitivity (specifically, the size of the top-cycle) of aggregated preference. The new scores are shown to measure important aspects of alternatives not captured by extant scoring methods and illustrated in collective choice settings.","PeriodicalId":306816,"journal":{"name":"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Microeconomics eJournal","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Orderings Based on the Banks Set: Some New Scoring Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision Making\",\"authors\":\"Scott Moser\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1987299\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper introduces new methods for ranking alternatives in multi-criteria decision making situations. Each is based on the normative position that the strength of an alternative is inversely related to the number of alternatives that could prevent it from being chosen. The scores discriminate among elements of the Banks set [Banks, 85]. The new scoring methods are compared to traditional scoring methods and related to the amount of intransitivity (specifically, the size of the top-cycle) of aggregated preference. The new scores are shown to measure important aspects of alternatives not captured by extant scoring methods and illustrated in collective choice settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":306816,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Microeconomics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-10-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Microeconomics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1987299\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Econometrics: Applied Econometric Modeling in Microeconomics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1987299","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了多准则决策情况下备选方案排序的新方法。每一种方法都基于一种规范的立场,即一种选择的强度与可能阻止它被选择的选择的数量成反比。分数在Banks集合的元素之间是有区别的[Banks, 85]。新的评分方法与传统的评分方法进行了比较,并与聚合偏好的不可传递性的数量(特别是顶循环的大小)相关。新的分数被用来衡量替代方案的重要方面,这些方面没有被现有的评分方法所捕获,并在集体选择设置中加以说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Orderings Based on the Banks Set: Some New Scoring Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision Making
This paper introduces new methods for ranking alternatives in multi-criteria decision making situations. Each is based on the normative position that the strength of an alternative is inversely related to the number of alternatives that could prevent it from being chosen. The scores discriminate among elements of the Banks set [Banks, 85]. The new scoring methods are compared to traditional scoring methods and related to the amount of intransitivity (specifically, the size of the top-cycle) of aggregated preference. The new scores are shown to measure important aspects of alternatives not captured by extant scoring methods and illustrated in collective choice settings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Urban Growth Shadows Does Institutional Change in Universities Influence High-Tech Entrepreneurship? Evidence from China’s Project 985 Preferences vs. Opportunities: Racial/Ethnic Intermarriage in the United States Do Employers Use Unemployment as a Sorting Criterion When Hiring? Evidence from a Field Experiment Orderings Based on the Banks Set: Some New Scoring Methods for Multi-Criteria Decision Making
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1