{"title":"Promethee γ:一种新的基于Promethee的基于单准则净流量得分的有值联盟的部分排序方法","authors":"Gilles Dejaegere, Yves De Smet","doi":"10.1002/mcda.1805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Multicriteria decision aid consists of helping decision makers to compare (rank, choose, sort, etc.) different alternatives which are evaluated on conflicting criteria. In the last decades, numerous decision aid methods have been developed. Three main categories of decision aid methods are usually considered: the aggregating, interactive and outranking methods. While aggregation methods produce a complete ranking of the set of alternatives, outranking methods usually allow some pairs of alternatives to remain incomparable. This happens either if the two alternatives present some strong conflicting information or if there are not enough elements in the decision problem to state the preference or indifference between them. A well-known family of outranking procedures are the <span>Promethee</span> methods. The aim of this work is first to provide an analysis of the incomparability relation produced by <span>Promethee I</span>. From our point of view, some shortcomings of this incomparability relation are presented. Then, a new method based on the comparison of weighted coalitions of mono-criterion net flow score differences, called <span>Promethee</span> <math>\n <mrow>\n <mi>γ</mi>\n </mrow></math>, is proposed. <span>Promethee</span> <math>\n <mrow>\n <mi>γ</mi>\n </mrow></math> and <span>Promethee i</span> are then further compared.</p>","PeriodicalId":45876,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","volume":"30 3-4","pages":"147-160"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Promethee γ: A new Promethee based method for partial ranking based on valued coalitions of monocriterion net flow scores\",\"authors\":\"Gilles Dejaegere, Yves De Smet\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mcda.1805\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Multicriteria decision aid consists of helping decision makers to compare (rank, choose, sort, etc.) different alternatives which are evaluated on conflicting criteria. In the last decades, numerous decision aid methods have been developed. Three main categories of decision aid methods are usually considered: the aggregating, interactive and outranking methods. While aggregation methods produce a complete ranking of the set of alternatives, outranking methods usually allow some pairs of alternatives to remain incomparable. This happens either if the two alternatives present some strong conflicting information or if there are not enough elements in the decision problem to state the preference or indifference between them. A well-known family of outranking procedures are the <span>Promethee</span> methods. The aim of this work is first to provide an analysis of the incomparability relation produced by <span>Promethee I</span>. From our point of view, some shortcomings of this incomparability relation are presented. Then, a new method based on the comparison of weighted coalitions of mono-criterion net flow score differences, called <span>Promethee</span> <math>\\n <mrow>\\n <mi>γ</mi>\\n </mrow></math>, is proposed. <span>Promethee</span> <math>\\n <mrow>\\n <mi>γ</mi>\\n </mrow></math> and <span>Promethee i</span> are then further compared.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"volume\":\"30 3-4\",\"pages\":\"147-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-07\",\"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.1805\",\"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.1805","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Promethee γ: A new Promethee based method for partial ranking based on valued coalitions of monocriterion net flow scores
Multicriteria decision aid consists of helping decision makers to compare (rank, choose, sort, etc.) different alternatives which are evaluated on conflicting criteria. In the last decades, numerous decision aid methods have been developed. Three main categories of decision aid methods are usually considered: the aggregating, interactive and outranking methods. While aggregation methods produce a complete ranking of the set of alternatives, outranking methods usually allow some pairs of alternatives to remain incomparable. This happens either if the two alternatives present some strong conflicting information or if there are not enough elements in the decision problem to state the preference or indifference between them. A well-known family of outranking procedures are the Promethee methods. The aim of this work is first to provide an analysis of the incomparability relation produced by Promethee I. From our point of view, some shortcomings of this incomparability relation are presented. Then, a new method based on the comparison of weighted coalitions of mono-criterion net flow score differences, called Promethee , is proposed. Promethee and Promethee i are then further compared.
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.