Multicriteria ranking using weights which minimize the score range

Various schemes have been proposed for generating a set of non-subjective weights when aggregating multiple criteria for the purposes of ranking or selecting alternatives. The maximin approach chooses the weights which maximise the lowest score (assuming there is an upper bound to scores). This is equivalent to finding the weights which minimize the maximum deviation, or range, between the worst and best scores (minimax). At first glance this seems to be an equitable way of apportioning weight, and the Rawlsian theory of justice has been cited in its support.We draw a distinction between using the maximin rule for the purpose of assessing performance, and using it for allocating resources amongst the alternatives. We demonstrate that it has a number of drawbacks which make it inappropriate for the assessment of performance. Specifically, it is tantamount to allowing the worst performers to decide the worth of the criteria so as to maximise their overall score. Furthermore, when making a selection from a list of alternatives, the final choice is highly sensitive to the removal or inclusion of alternatives whose performance is so poor that they are clearly irrelevant to the choice at hand

Dominance Measuring Method Performance under Incomplete Information about Weights.

In multi-attribute utility theory, it is often not easy to elicit precise values for the scaling weights representing the relative importance of criteria. A very widespread approach is to gather incomplete information. A recent approach for dealing with such situations is to use information about each alternative?s intensity of dominance, known as dominance measuring methods. Different dominancemeasuring methods have been proposed, and simulation studies have been carried out to compare these methods with each other and with other approaches but only when ordinal information about weights is available. In this paper, we useMonte Carlo simulation techniques to analyse the performance of and adapt such methods to deal with weight intervals, weights fitting independent normal probability distributions orweights represented by fuzzy numbers.Moreover, dominance measuringmethod performance is also compared with a widely used methodology dealing with incomplete information on weights, the stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA). SMAA is based on exploring the weight space to describe the evaluations that would make each alternative the preferred one

GIS-based multicriteria analysis as decision support in flood risk management

In this report we develop a GIS-based multicriteria flood risk assessment and mapping approach. This approach has the ability a) to consider also flood risks which are not measured in monetary terms, b) to show the spatial distribution of these multiple risks and c) to deal with uncertainties in criteria values and to show their influence on the overall assessment. It can furthermore be used to show the spatial distribution of the effects of risk reduction measures. The approach is tested for a pilot study at the River Mulde in Saxony, Germany. Therefore, a GISdataset of economic as well as social and environmental risk criteria is built up. Two multicriteria decision rules, a disjunctive approach and an additive weighting approach are used to come to an overall assessment and mapping of flood risk in the area. Both the risk calculation and mapping of single criteria as well as the multicriteria analysis are supported by a software tool (FloodCalc) which was developed for this task. --

Fuzzy multi criteria evaluation for performance of bus companies

A multi criteria decision making in ranking the bus companies using fuzzy rule is proposed. The proposed method uses the application of fuzzy sets and approximate reasoning in deciding the ranking of the performance of several bus companies. The proposed method introduces data normalization using similarity function which dampens extreme values that exist in the data. The use of the model is suitable in evaluating situation that involves subjectivity, vagueness and imprecise information. Experimental results are comparable to several previous methods

Incorporating stakeholders’ knowledge in group decision-making

International audienc

Analysis of the potentials of multi criteria decision analysis methods to conduct sustainability assessment

Sustainability assessments require the management of a wide variety of information types, parameters and uncertainties. Multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) has been regarded as a suitable set of methods to perform sustainability evaluations as a result of its flexibility and the possibility of facilitating the dialogue between stakeholders, analysts and scientists. However, it has been reported that researchers do not usually properly define the reasons for choosing a certain MCDA method instead of another. Familiarity and affinity with a certain approach seem to be the drivers for the choice of a certain procedure. This review paper presents the performance of five MCDA methods (i.e. MAUT, AHP, PROMETHEE, ELECTRE and DRSA) in respect to ten crucial criteria that sustainability assessments tools should satisfy, among which are a life cycle perspective, thresholds and uncertainty management, software support and ease of use. The review shows that MAUT and AHP are fairly simple to understand and have good software support, but they are cognitively demanding for the decision makers, and can only embrace a weak sustainability perspective as trade-offs are the norm. Mixed information and uncertainty can be managed by all the methods, while robust results can only be obtained with MAUT. ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and DRSA are non-compensatory approaches which consent to use a strong sustainability concept, accept a variety of thresholds, but suffer from rank reversal. DRSA is less demanding in terms of preference elicitation, is very easy to understand and provides a straightforward set of decision rules expressed in the form of elementary “if … then …” conditions. Dedicated software is available for all the approaches with a medium to wide range of results capability representation. DRSA emerges as the easiest method, followed by AHP, PROMETHEE and MAUT, while ELECTRE is regarded as fairly difficult. Overall, the analysis has shown that most of the requirements are satisfied by the MCDA methods (although to different extents) with the exclusion of management of mixed data types and adoption of life cycle perspective which are covered by all the considered approaches