Igor Danilo Costa Matos, Helder Gomes Costa, Marcos Roboredo, Diogo Lima
{"title":"改进 PROMETHEE 评分方法:命题和经济自由度评估","authors":"Igor Danilo Costa Matos, Helder Gomes Costa, Marcos Roboredo, Diogo Lima","doi":"10.1002/mcda.1835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The recent PROMETHEE-Scoring approach offers a method for generating cardinal scores through an outranking procedure utilizing Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability and <span></span><math>\n <semantics>\n <mrow>\n <mi>σ</mi>\n </mrow>\n <annotation>$$ \\sigma $$</annotation>\n </semantics></math>–<span></span><math>\n <semantics>\n <mrow>\n <mi>μ</mi>\n </mrow>\n <annotation>$$ \\mu $$</annotation>\n </semantics></math> analysis. In this paper, we illustrate some undesirable effects of this method and explore possible approaches to address them. First, we modify the original LP by inserting a new constraint that limits negative impacts caused by alternatives with low flow mean and standard deviation. Also, clustering is used to identify outliers in the decision matrix that may induce undesirable effects. A toy example demonstrates the issues and explores the proposed implementations. In addition, a numerical application is presented where a set of countries is ordered based on criteria from an economic freedom assessment. Both the numerical application and the toy example show that the propositions can improve the consistency of the results and prevent inconsistent outputs. The results include comparisons between the rank of alternatives when using purely the PROMETHEE-Scoring method, the proposed improvements, and the expected results from SMAA-PROMETHEE.</p>","PeriodicalId":45876,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","volume":"31 3-4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Refining the PROMETHEE-scoring method: Propositions and an economic freedom assessment\",\"authors\":\"Igor Danilo Costa Matos, Helder Gomes Costa, Marcos Roboredo, Diogo Lima\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mcda.1835\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The recent PROMETHEE-Scoring approach offers a method for generating cardinal scores through an outranking procedure utilizing Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability and <span></span><math>\\n <semantics>\\n <mrow>\\n <mi>σ</mi>\\n </mrow>\\n <annotation>$$ \\\\sigma $$</annotation>\\n </semantics></math>–<span></span><math>\\n <semantics>\\n <mrow>\\n <mi>μ</mi>\\n </mrow>\\n <annotation>$$ \\\\mu $$</annotation>\\n </semantics></math> analysis. In this paper, we illustrate some undesirable effects of this method and explore possible approaches to address them. First, we modify the original LP by inserting a new constraint that limits negative impacts caused by alternatives with low flow mean and standard deviation. Also, clustering is used to identify outliers in the decision matrix that may induce undesirable effects. A toy example demonstrates the issues and explores the proposed implementations. In addition, a numerical application is presented where a set of countries is ordered based on criteria from an economic freedom assessment. Both the numerical application and the toy example show that the propositions can improve the consistency of the results and prevent inconsistent outputs. The results include comparisons between the rank of alternatives when using purely the PROMETHEE-Scoring method, the proposed improvements, and the expected results from SMAA-PROMETHEE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"volume\":\"31 3-4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1835\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1835","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Refining the PROMETHEE-scoring method: Propositions and an economic freedom assessment
The recent PROMETHEE-Scoring approach offers a method for generating cardinal scores through an outranking procedure utilizing Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability and – analysis. In this paper, we illustrate some undesirable effects of this method and explore possible approaches to address them. First, we modify the original LP by inserting a new constraint that limits negative impacts caused by alternatives with low flow mean and standard deviation. Also, clustering is used to identify outliers in the decision matrix that may induce undesirable effects. A toy example demonstrates the issues and explores the proposed implementations. In addition, a numerical application is presented where a set of countries is ordered based on criteria from an economic freedom assessment. Both the numerical application and the toy example show that the propositions can improve the consistency of the results and prevent inconsistent outputs. The results include comparisons between the rank of alternatives when using purely the PROMETHEE-Scoring method, the proposed improvements, and the expected results from SMAA-PROMETHEE.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis was launched in 1992, and from the outset has aimed to be the repository of choice for papers covering all aspects of MCDA/MCDM. The journal provides an international forum for the presentation and discussion of all aspects of research, application and evaluation of multi-criteria decision analysis, and publishes material from a variety of disciplines and all schools of thought. Papers addressing mathematical, theoretical, and behavioural aspects are welcome, as are case studies, applications and evaluation of techniques and methodologies.