1990
DOI: 10.1080/03081089008818030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tournament matrices and their generalizations, I.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

1992
1992
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then Moon and Pullman extended their idea to derive similar results for the generalized tournament matrices [21]. And, subsequently, Maybee and Pullman [18] considered more general matrices, the pseudo-tournament matrices, in which they introduced h-hypertournament matrices and showed that −1/2…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Then Moon and Pullman extended their idea to derive similar results for the generalized tournament matrices [21]. And, subsequently, Maybee and Pullman [18] considered more general matrices, the pseudo-tournament matrices, in which they introduced h-hypertournament matrices and showed that −1/2…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The score vector can be used to obtain information about eigenvalues of A, see [16], [18]. Note that the score vector s satisfies s t · 1 = n(n − 1)/2 and s t s n(n − 1) 2 /4 with equality if and only if it is regular.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…( 1 . 1 ) This class of matrices was originally studied by Maybee & Pullman [13], and is a generalisation of the following classes of tournament-like matrices satisfying Eq. (1.1) that have received considerable attention in recent decades:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The problem of pairwise comparison appears in various fields and scientists coming from very different areas have worked on this topic: mathematicians (Moon, 1968;Moon and Pullman, 1970;Monjardet, 1978;Reid and Beneke, 1978;Maybee and Pullman, 1990;Saary, 1994), statisticians (Kendall and Smith, 1940;David, 1963), social scientists (Fishburn, 1974(Fishburn, , 1977Moulin, 1983;Young, 1988), decision scientists (Roy and BOUYSSOU, 1992) and psychologists (Saaty, 1977). In this very extensive landscape we can make distinctions about both the nature of the data involved and the nature of the question raised.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%