Utopia in the solution of the Bucket Order Problem

Aledo, Juan A.; Gmez, Jos A.; Rosete, Alejandro

doi:10.1016/j.dss.2017.03.006

Cited by 25 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, by definition the solution to the RAP must be a permutation. Because of this, the third method we consider looks for the solution of a different problem, the optimal bucket order problem (OBOP; Aledo et al, ; Gionis et al, ; Ukkonen et al, ), where the solution is a bucket order or complete ranking with ties, that is, an ordered partition of

[[n]]

.…”

Section: Methods For Computing the Consensus Rankingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consensus‐based journal rankings: A complementary tool for bibliometric evaluation

Aledo

Gámez

Melodelima

et al. 2018

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Annual journal rankings are usually considered a tool for the evaluation of research and researchers. Although they are an objective resource for such evaluation, they also present drawbacks: (a) the uncertainty about the definite position of a target journal in the corresponding annual ranking when selecting a journal, and (b) in spite of the nonsignificant difference in score (for instance, impact factor) between consecutive journals in the ranking, the journals are strictly ranked and eventually placed in different terciles/quartiles, which may have a significant influence in the subsequent evaluation. In this article we present several proposals to obtain an aggregated consensus ranking as an alternative/complementary tool to standardize annual rankings. To illustrate the proposed methodology we use as a case study the Journal Citation Reports, and in particular the category of Computer Science: Artificial Intelligence (CS:AI). In the context of the consensus rankings obtained by the different methods, we discuss the convenience of using one or the other procedure according to the corresponding framework. In particular, our proposals allow us to obtain consensus rankings that avoid crisp frontiers between similarly ranked journals and consider the longitudinal/temporal evolution of the journals.

show abstract

[[n]]

.…”

Section: Methods For Computing the Consensus Rankingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, recursive calls are carried out for the lists before and after . The Achilles heel of BPA is the random selection of the pivot (Aledo et al, ); thus, it is usually run several times and the best bucket order obtained is returned.…”

Section: Methods For Computing the Consensus Rankingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consensus‐based journal rankings: A complementary tool for bibliometric evaluation

Aledo

Gámez

Melodelima

et al. 2018

Asso for Info Science & Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We highlight the introduction of effective pruning techniques reducing the number of rankings for which we need to compute the cost associated with a closest profile of rankings for which

≻

is the acclaimed ranking. Another reasonable possibility would be to adopt a heuristic approach that would speed up the computation time of our proposed ranking rule, although some voters could feel deceived if a (slighlty) different outcome than the optimal one would be obtained.…”

Section: Conclusion and Open Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The acclamation consensus state and an associated ranking rule

Pérez‐Fernández

Baets

2019

Int J Intell Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of conditions, under which the existence of an “absolute” best winner can be assured, is a hot topic in the field of social choice. Unanimity is an evident example of a condition under which the winner is obvious. However, many more properties weaker than unanimity have been analysed in literature: the presence of a Condorcet winner, strong stochastic transitivity, the presence of a candidate that Borda dominates all other candidates, etc. Unfortunately, one could easily find a prominent ranking rule, for which the outcome does not agree with these relaxed conditions. In this study, we aim to identify a condition weaker than unanimity, but under which the social outcome is still obvious. This condition, defined as the conjunction of three properties already studied by the present authors and hereinafter referred to as acclamation, will be proven to be a meeting point for the most prominent ranking rules in social choice theory, and will be used for introducing an intuitively appealing ranking rule.

show abstract

“…to one. The so-called optimal bucket order problem (Gionis et al, 2006;Ukkonen et al, 2009;Kenkre et al, 2011;Aledo et al, 2017b), i.e., dealing with rank aggregation while allowing ties in the solution, is a recent description of the problem originally stateci by Kemeny and Snell (1962) when defined the median ranking. Within the Kemeny's axiomatic approach, both exact (Emond and Mason, 2002) and heuristic algorithms (Amadio et al, 2016;D'Ambrosia et al, 2017) have been proposed.…”

Section: Kemeny Distance and Median Rankingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rank aggregation problem has been approached using several different approaches, some of which work only when complete rankings are used as the input and produce an output that is a full con sensus ranking (Meila et al, 2007;Aledo et al, 2013;D'Ambrosia et al, 2015). Other proposals work with complete, tied and partial rankings and produce an out put solution that either can contain ties (Emond and Mason, 2002;Gionis et al, 2006;Lin and Ding, 2009;Ukkonen et al, 2009;Lin, 2010;Amodio et al, 2016;D'Ambrosia et al, 2017;Aledo et al, 2017b) or cannot contain ties ( Aledo et al, 2017a;Badal and Das, 2018). By following the classification made by Cook (2006), there are two broad classes of approaches to consensus ranking: the so-called ad hoc methods, which are generally based on counting such as Borda or Condorcet-like tools, and the distance-based approaches, for which the detection of the consensus ranking is based on the minimization of a distance measure that is suitably defined for preference rankings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Median constrained bucket order rank aggregation

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rank aggregation problem can be summarized as the problem of aggregating individua! preferences expressed by a set of judges to obtain a ranking that represents the best synthesis of their choices. Several approaches for handling this problem have been proposed and are generally linked with either axiomatic frameworks or alternative strategies. In this paper, we present a new definition of median ranking and frame it within the Kemeny's axiomatic framework. Moreover, we show the usefulness of our approach in a practical case about triage prioritization.

show abstract

Utopia in the solution of the Bucket Order Problem

Cited by 25 publications

References 21 publications

Consensus‐based journal rankings: A complementary tool for bibliometric evaluation

Consensus‐based journal rankings: A complementary tool for bibliometric evaluation

The acclamation consensus state and an associated ranking rule

Median constrained bucket order rank aggregation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About