2012
DOI: 10.2478/v10209-011-0010-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolutionary multi-objective optimization for inferring outranking model’s parameters under scarce reference information and effects of reinforced preference

Abstract: Abstract. Methods based on fuzzy outranking relations constitute one of the main approaches to multiple criteria decision problems. The use of ELECTRE methods require the elicitation of a large number of parameters (weights and different thresholds); but direct eliciting is often a demanding task for the decision-maker (DM). For handling intensity-ofpreference effects on concordance levels, a generalized concordance model was proposed by Roy and Slowinski which is more complex than previous outranking models. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In multi-objective optimization, the DM 'learns' trade-offs while he/she finds and judges new Pareto solutions; thus his/her aprioristic preferences could be modified. Once the best compromise and others non-strictly outranked solutions have been obtained and evaluated by the DM, the model's parameter setting may be updated, perhaps using PDA as proposed in [63]. If the parameter values were modified, with an additional NO-ACO run the final best compromise should be reached.…”
Section: Evaluation Of No-aco Solutionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In multi-objective optimization, the DM 'learns' trade-offs while he/she finds and judges new Pareto solutions; thus his/her aprioristic preferences could be modified. Once the best compromise and others non-strictly outranked solutions have been obtained and evaluated by the DM, the model's parameter setting may be updated, perhaps using PDA as proposed in [63]. If the parameter values were modified, with an additional NO-ACO run the final best compromise should be reached.…”
Section: Evaluation Of No-aco Solutionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those judgments may be obtained from decisions made for a limited set of fictitious portfolios, or decisions taken for a subset of the portfolios under consideration for which the DM can easily make a judgment. In the framework of outranking methods, PDA has been recently approached in [62,63].…”
Section: K-preference: This Represents a State Of Doubt Betweenmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[10]). The parameter setting of  can be directly performed by the DM (probably in a constructive framework collaborating with a decision analyst), or be inferred by using an indirect elicitation method ( [11,12]). …”
Section: Notation and Premisesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be done by an interaction between the DM and a decision analyst, utilizing, if necessary, indirect elicitation methods to support this task ( [49,50,51]). …”
Section: The Best Portfolio In the Sense Of Fernandez Et Al ([10])mentioning
confidence: 99%