.png){kind=icon}
返回
Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
DOI：10.1016/j.omega.2005.12.003.png)
.png){kind=icon}
原文求助.png){kind=icon}
分享.png){kind=icon}
收藏
摘要
En 中文
The ELECTRE 11 and III methods enjoy a wide acceptance in solving multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems. Research results in this paper reveal that there are some compelling reasons to doubt the correctness of the proposed rankings when the ELECTRE 11 and III methods are used. In a typical test we first used these methods to determine the best alternative for a given MCDM problem. Next, we randomly replaced a non-optimal alternative by a worse one and repeated the calculations without changing any of the other data. Our computational tests revealed that sometimes the ELECTRE 11 and III methods might change the indication of the best alternative. We treat such phenomena as rank reversals. Although such ranking irregularities are well known for the additive variants of the AHP method, it is the very first time that they are reported to occur when the ELECTRE methods are used. These two methods are also evaluated in terms of two other ranking tests and they failed them as well. Two real-life cases are described to demonstrate the occurrence of rank reversals with the ELECTRE 11 and III methods. Based on the three test criteria presented in this paper, some computational experiments on randomly generated decision problems were executed to test the performance of the ELECTRE 11 and III methods and an examination of some real-life case studies are also discussed. The results of these examinations show that the rates of the three types of ranking irregularities were rather significant in both the simulated decision problems and the real-life cases studied in this paper. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keyword:
multi-criteria decision-making
ranking irregularities
ELECTRE methods
the analytic hierarchy process (AHP)
multiplicative AHP
AI总结
对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取，主要内容包括：简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。
期刊
O
IF:
7.2
论文数:
3.7K
被引数:
1.4W
机构
暂无机构信息
引用论文
.png){kind=icon}
分享收藏
查看更多内容