THE METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE RANKING FOR A COLLECTIVE EXPERT ESTIMATION PROCEDURE
Keywords:Decision making, utility theory, multi-criteria estimates, comparative identification, utility function.
Context. The actual problem of constructing a mathematical model of a collective multi-criteria expert estimation of alternatives, which is an integral part of the automation of the intellectual decision-making process, has been solved.
Objective. The goal of the work is to develop a method for determining relative collective multi-criteria estimation of alternatives and their subsequent ranking based on information about personal preferences of experts. The object of research is the process of analysis and decision-making in multi-criteria conditions. The subject of the research are the methods of structural and parametric identification of the model of multi-criteria estimation of alternatives.
Method. The paper proposes an approach to constructing a model of collective multi-criteria estimation of alternatives based on information about partial-order relationships established by experts on the set of available alternatives. A method for structural and parametric identification of a model of multi-criteria estimation, which based on the ideas of the theory of comparator identification is proposed. It is shown that the solution to the problem of choosing the structure of a model of optimal complexity should be carried out in the class of Kolmogorov-Gabors polynomial. To find the parameters of the estimation model, it is proposed to use a method that is based on the calculating of the Chebyshev point. It is shown that in this case, the parametric identification problem of the model can be reduced to the standard linear programming problem. The scalar collective multi-criteria estimates of alternatives obtained on the basis of the synthesized mathematical model make it possible to compare them with each other in terms of “quality” and, thus, select the “best” of them or rank them.
Results. An approach has been developed to construct a mathematical model of collective multi-criteria expert estimation, on the basis of which it is possible to determine group generalized estimates of alternatives, as well as to rank them. The results of simulation modeling, which demonstrate the practical feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed approach are presented.
Conclusions. A significant advantage of the approach is the ability to use only non-numerical information about the preferences of experts. This allows you to partially solve the problem of subjectivity of expert opinions in the process of decision-making and reduce the cost of a collective expert estimation of alternatives. The synthesized model of collective expert estimation can serve as the basis for solving the problems of estimating the quality of various projects, investment management, strategic planning, and the development of problem-oriented decision support systems. In the future, it is worth considering the possibility of supplementing the presented approach with the possibility of taking into account estimates of the qualitative composition and competence of individual experts, which are included in the group.
Krjuchkovskij V. V. Petrov E. G., Sokolova N. A., Hodakov V. E. Introspektivnyj analiz: metody i sredstva jekspertnogo ocenivanija. Herson, Izdatel̓̓’stvo Grin’ D.S., 2011, 169 p.
Petrov K. E., Krjuchkovskij V. V. Komparatornaja strukturnoparametricheskaja identifikacija modelej skaljarnogo mnogofaktornogo ocenivanija. Herson, Oldi-pljus, 2009, 294 p.
Saaty T. L. The Analytic Hierarchy and Analytic Network Processes for the Measurement of Intangible Criteria and for Decision-Making, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. New York, Springer, 2016, Vol. 233, pp. 363−419. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_1
Figueira J. Mousseau V., Roy B. ELECTRE Methods, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. New York, Springer, 2016, Vol. 233, pp. 155−185. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_5
Brans J. P. Smet Y. De PROMETHEE Methods, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. New York, Springer, 2016, Vol. 233, pp. 187−219. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_6
Papathanasiou J., Ploskas N. TOPSIS, Multiple Criteria Decision Aid. Springer Optimization and Its Applications. Cham, Springer, 2018, Vol. 136, pp. 1−30. DOI: 10.1007/978-3319-91648-4_1
Larichev O. I. Teorija i metody prinjatija reshenij, a takzhe hronika sobytij v volshebnoj strane. Moscow, Logos, 2000, 294 p.
Petrovskij A. B. Teorija prinjatija reshenij. Moscow, Izdatel’skij centr «Akademija», 2009, 400 p.
Podinovskij V. V., Gavrilov V. M. Optimizacija po posledovatel’no primenjaemym kriterijam. Moscow, LENAND, 2016, 194 p.
Keeney R. L., Raiffa H. Decisions with multiple objectives– preferences and value tradeoffs. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1993, 569 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139174084
Larichev O. I. Verbal’nyj analiz reshenij. Moscow, Nauka, 2006, 186 p.
Lomazov V. A., Matorin S. I., Nehotina V. S. Kognitivnaja model’ processa prinjatija reshenija pri vybore metodov ocenivanija ITproektov, Fundamental’nye issledovanija, 2015, No. 6–3, pp. 490−496.
Dyer J. S. Multiattribute Utility Theory (MAUT), Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science. New York, Springer, 2016, Vol. 233, pp. 285−314. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_8
Bidoux L., Pignon P., Benaben F. Planning with preferences using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory along with a Choquet Integral, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2019, Vol. 85, pp. 808−817. DOI: 10.1016/j.engappai.2019.08.002
Bukhsh Z. A. , Stipanovic I., Klanker G., O’Connor A., Doree A. G. Network level bridges maintenance planning using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 2019, Vol. 15, No. 7, pp. 872−885. DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2017.1414858
Yi Z., Wen Y., Wu X. Impacts of networking effects on software reliability growth processes: A multi-attribute utility theory approach, Quality and Reliability Engineering International, 2019, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 1952−1972. DOI: 10.1002/qre.2486
Alshamrani O., Alshibani A., Alogaili M. Analytic Hierarchy Process & Multi Attribute Utility Theory Based Approach for the Selection of Lighting Systems in Residential Buildings: A Case Study, Buildings, 2018, Vol. 8, № 6, P. 73. DOI: 10.3390/buildings8060073
Bregar A. Decision support on the basis of utility models with discordance-related preferential information: investigation of risk aversion properties, Journal of Decision Systems, 2018, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 236–247. DOI: 10.1080/12460125.2018.1468170
Kolmogorov A. N. O predstavlenii nepreryvnyh funkcij neskol’kih peremennyh v vide superpozicij nepreryvnyh funkcij odnogo peremennogo i slozhenija, Doklady AN SSSR, 1957, Vol. 5(114), pp. 953–956.
Ovezgel’dyev A. O., Petrov K. E. Modeling individual multifactor estimation using GMDH elements and genetic algorithms, Cybernetics and Systems Analysis, 2007, Vol. 43, pp. 126–133. DOI: 10.1007/s10559-007-0031-0
Tihonov A. N., Arsenin V. Ja. Metody reshenija nekorrektnyh zadach. Mosc Nauka, 1986. – 288 s.
Zuhovickij S. I., Avdeeva L. I.. Linejnoe i vypukloe programmirovanie. Moscow, Nauka, 1967, 460 p.
Sitkov R. A., Shhel’nikov V. N., Petrushin I. E. Metodika provedenija jekspertnogo oprosa po ocenivaniju svojstv i faktorov, vlijajushhih na kachestvo i kompetentnost’ jekspertov, Fundamental’nye issledovanija, 2016, No. 11–5, pp. 944–948.
Ovezgel’dyev A. O., Petrov K. E. Fuzzy-Interval Choice of Alternatives in Collective Expert Evaluation, Cybernetics and Systems Analysis, 2016, Vol. 52, pp. 269–276. DOI: 10.1007/s10559-0169823-4
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 К. Э. Петров, А. А. Дейнеко, О. В. Чалая, И. Ю. Панферова
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Creative Commons Licensing Notifications in the Copyright Notices
The journal allows the authors to hold the copyright without restrictions and to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
The journal allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles.
The journal allows to reuse and remixing of its content, in accordance with a Creative Commons license СС BY -SA.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY-SA that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.