Justification and Classification of Evaluation Fused in Rating Methods of Multi-criteria Choice
- Authors: Mikoni S.V1, Burakov D.P1
-
Affiliations:
- St. Petersburg Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences
- Issue: Vol 19, No 6 (2020)
- Pages: 1131-1165
- Section: Mathematical modeling and applied mathematics
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2713-3192/article/view/266288
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.15622/ia.2020.19.6.1
- ID: 266288
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Taking into account the diversity of MDE methods, it was decided to limit ourselves to the systematization of methods that use evaluation functions (EF), and on this basis to offer general recommendations for their application.
The review of MDE methods from a unified position required clarification of the terminology used in them. On the basis of the formal model of the criterion, the relationship between the concepts of "preference", "criterion" and "indicator" is established. To highlight the methods that use evaluation functions, the concept of the target value of the indicator is introduced. Regarding its location on the indicator scale, the concepts of ideal and real goals are introduced. The criteria corresponding to these goals are divided into target and restrictive ones. Using the proposed terminology, a review of the most well-known MDE methods was carried out. Of these, a group of methods using evaluation functions is distinguished.
Variants of evaluation functions created on the basis of the criterion and postulates of the theory of value and utility are considered. On the basis of the similarity of the domains of definition and the meanings of EFs, the relationship between them is established. Regarding the target value of the indicator, they are divided into the functions of achieving the goal and functions of deviation from the goal. The mutual complementarity of these functions is shown. A group of functions of deviation from the goal is highlighted, which allows us to order objects separately according to penalties and rewards in relation to achieving a real goal. The concept of norm is introduced for the correspondence relation. On the example of medical analyzes, the practical application of deviation functions from the norm is shown using both the minimax and the weighted average generalizing function to establish a rating on a set of objects.
The similarities and differences of the EFs revealed in the course of the study form the basis for the classification of the MDE methods that use them. The difference in EFs in terms of the complexity of creation is reflected in the proposed methodology for their application.
About the authors
S. V Mikoni
St. Petersburg Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: smikoni@mail.ru
14-th Line V.O. 39
D. P Burakov
St. Petersburg Federal Research Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Email: burakovdmitry8@gmail.com
14-th Line V.O. 39
References
- Neumann J.V., Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior // Princeton University Press. 1953. 586 p.
- Keeney R.L., Raiffa H. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs // Wiley. 1976. 452 p.
- Saaty T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resources Allocation // Mcgraw-Hill. 1980. 586 p.
- Wierzbicki A.P. The Use of Reference Objectives in Multiobjective Optimization // Multiple Criteria Decision Making Theory and Application. Lecture Notes in Eco-nomics and Mathematical Systems. 1980. vol. 177. pp. 468–486.
- Hwang S.L, Yoon K. Multiple Attributes Decision Making Methods and Applications // Berlin Heidelberg. 1981. 269 p.
- Семенов С.С. Оценка качества и технического уровня сложных систем: практика применения метода экспертных оценок // М.: Ленанд. 2015. 350 с.
- Abastante F. et al. Choice architecture for architecture choices: evaluating social housing initiatives putting together a parsimonious AHP methodology and the Cho-quet integral // Land Use Policy. 2018. vol. 78. pp. 748–762.
- De Boni A., Roma R., Ottomano Palmisano G. Fishery Policy in the European Union: A Multiple Criteria approach for assessing sustainable management of Coastal Devel-opment Plans in Southern Italy // Ocean and Coastal Management. 2018. vol. 163. pp. 11–21.
- Greco S., Ishizaka A., Matarazzo B., Torrisi G. Stochastic multiattribute acceptability analysis: an application to the ranking of Italian regions // Regional Studies. 2018. vol. 52.n. 4. pp. 585–600.
- Бураков Н.А., Бухвальд Е.М., Кольчугина А.В. Ранжирование субъектов россий-ской федерации на основе регионального индекса экономического развития // Федерализм. 2019. № 3. С. 149–171.
- Ogryszak W. et al. Large-scale periodic routing problems for supporting planning of mobile personnel tasks // Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 2018. vol. 559. pp. 205–216.
- Vergara-Solana F., Araneda M., Ponce-Díaz G. Opportunities for strengthening aqua-culture industry through multicriteria decision-making // Reviews in Aquaculture. 2019. vol. 11. no. 1. pp. 105–118.
- Хабарова Д.С. Обзор программных комплексов многокритериальной оптимиза-ции // Прикладная информатика. 2013. № 2(44). С. 102–112.
- Velasquez M., Hester P.T. An Analysis of Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods // International Journal of Operations Research. 2013. vol. 10. no. 2. pp. 56–66.
- Микони С.В., Соколов Б.В., Юсупов Р.М. Квалиметрия моделей и полимодельных комплексов // М.: РАН. 2018. 314 с.
- Saaty T.L. The analytic hierarchy and analytic network measurement processes: Applications to decisions under Risk // European Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics. 2008. vol. 1. no. 1. pp. 122–196.
- Roy B. Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE) // La Revue d'Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO). 1968. vol. 8. pp. 57–75.
- Brans J.P., Vincke P. A preference ranking organisation method: The PROMETHEE method for MCDM // Management Science. 1985. vol. 31. no. 6. pp. 647–656.
- Ларичев О.И. Вербальный анализ решений // М.: Наука. 2006. 181 c.
- Шакиров В.А., Панкратьев П.С. Методика многокритериального двухуровнево-го анализа пунктов размещения электростанций // Искусственный интеллект и принятие решений. 2017. № 1. С. 69–83.
- Микони С.В. Теория принятия управленческих решений // CПб.: Лань. 2015. 448 с.
- Bordley R., LiCalzi M. Decision Analysis with Targets instead of Utilities // Decisions in Economics and Finance. 2000. vol. 23. no. 1. pp. 53–74.
- Mikoni S.V. Method of choice by approximation to a pattern // Proceedings of the 4th International Conference NITE’2000. 2000. vol. 1. pp. 156–159.
- Перегудов Ф.И., Тарасенко Ф.П. Основы системного анализа: Учеб. 2-е изд., доп. // НТЛ. 1997. 396 с.
- Микони С. В. Аксиоматика методов многокритериальной оптимизации на ко-нечном множестве альтернатив. // Труды СПИИРАН. 2016. Вып. 44. C. 198–214.
- Микони С.В., Бураков Д.П. Отладка типовых одномерных функций полезности в модели многомерной полезности // Известия Петербургского университета пу-тей сообщения. 2019. Т. 16(2). С. 131–144.
- Kosheleva O., Kreinovich V., Shahbazova S. Type-2 Fuzzy Analysis Explains Ubiqui-ty of Triangular and Trapezoid Membership Functions // Recent Developments and the New Direction in Soft-Computing Foundations and Applications. Studies in Fuzz-iness and Soft Computing. 2018. vol. 393. pp. 63–75.
- Gholamy A., Kosheleva O., Kreinovich V. How to explain the efficiency of triangular and trapezoid membership functions in applications to design // Онтология проекти-рования. 2019. Т. 9. № 2(32). С. 253–260.
- Сайт научной школы «Многокритериальный выбор на конечном множестве альтернатив». URL: http://mcd-svir.ru/ (дата обращения: 26.08.2020).
- Mikoni S.V. Application of the Universal Decision Support System SVIR to Solving Urban Problems // Digital Transformation and Global Society. DTGS 2016. Commu-nications in Computer and Information Science. 2016. vol. 674. 016. pp. 1–14.
Supplementary files
