Enhancing knowledge construction processes within multicriteria decision analysis: The Collaborative Value Modelling framework

This paper proposes a new Collaborative Value Modelling framework, that combines Delphi and multicriteria decision conferencing, to build widely informed evaluation models. Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is commonly used to help decision-makers and other stakeholders in complex evaluation contexts. Further to the technical soundness and meaningfulness of the methods and tools used, it is critical to design adequate social processes to promote shared understanding around key evaluation issues while capturing multiple stakeholders’ values and perspectives. Multicriteria decision conferencing processes have been typically adopted for collaborative modelling using MCDA methods in decision conferences with relatively small groups. Such a socio-technical approach has proven to be effective, in a variety of contexts, in creating a collaborative environment that enables surfacing individual beliefs, identifying common concerns, managing eventual value conflicts and promoting agreement in group model building. But, extending this framework to broader participatory contexts requires a different design of the social process, in order to ensure that model building captures the full panoply of points of view. This challenge can be tackled by enhancing multicriteria decision conferencing with an all-embracing (Web-)Delphi participatory process. We depart from the existing collaborative knowledge acquisition methodology to design, with the Delphi method, a participatory knowledge construction process that elicits and analyses individual judgemental knowledge from a (very) large and diverse number of stakeholders. The knowledge acquired is then digested by a small group of key-players, in a subsequent decision conferencing, to collaboratively develop a widely informed multicriteria evaluation model. This new Web-Delphi-decision conferencing social setting has been tested already in real complex evaluation contexts using a specific multicriteria method, the Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical Based Evaluation Technique (MACBETH), to develop a variety of value modelling activities. We call this socio-technical design the Collaborative Value Modelling framework. Here, we describe its real use to support the construction of value functions, focusing on how the judgemental knowledge collected flows between the participatory and collaborative stages of the framework. Results validate that enhancing MACBETH decision conferencing with an ex ante Web-Delphi process fosters higher participation and collaboration in multicriteria modelling.     

Concepts,Theory, and Techniques DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEM DESIGN: A MULTICRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHODOLOGY*

The design of distributed computer systems (DCSs) requires compromise among several conflicting objectives. For instance, high system availability conflicts with low cost which in turn conflicts with quick response time. This paper presents an approach, based on multi-criteria decision-making techniques, to arrive at a good design in this multiobjective environment. An interactive procedure is developed to support the decision making of system designers. Starting from an initial solution, the procedure presents a sequence of non-dominated vectors to designers, allowing them to explore systematically alternative possibilities on the path to a final design. The model user has control over trade-offs among different design objectives. This paper focuses on the details of the mathematical model used to provide decision support. Accordingly, a formulation of DCS design as a multicriteria decision problem is developed. The exchange search heuristic used to generate nondominated solutions also is presented. We argue that multicriteria models provide a more realistic formulation of the DCS design problem than the single-criterion models used widely in the literature. While obtaining a clear definition of design objectives (single or multiple) is an important activity, by explicitly acknowledging the trade-offs among multiple objectives in the design process, our methodology is more likely to produce a better overall design than methods addressing a single criterion in isolation.     

A Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach for an Enhanced Assessment of Seasonal Influenza Risk

Accounting for about 290,000–650,000 deaths across the globe, seasonal influenza is estimated by the World Health Organization to be a major cause of mortality. Hence, there is a need for a reliable and robust epidemiological surveillance decision-making system to understand and combat this epidemic disease. In a previous study, the authors proposed a decision support system to fight against seasonal influenza. This system is composed of three subsystems: (i) modeling and simulation, (ii) data warehousing, and (iii) analysis. The analysis subsystem relies on spatial online analytical processing (S-OLAP) technology. Although the S-OLAP technology is useful in analyzing multidimensional spatial data sets, it cannot take into account the inherent multicriteria nature of seasonal influenza risk assessment by itself. Therefore, the objective of this article is to extend the existing decision support system by adding advanced multicriteria analysis capabilities for enhanced seasonal influenza risk assessment and monitoring. Bearing in mind the characteristics of the decision problem considered in this article, a well-known multicriteria classification method, the dominance-based rough set approach (DRSA), was selected to boost the existing decision support system. Combining the S-OLAP technology and the multicriteria classification method DRSA in the same decision support system will largely improve and extend the scope of analysis capabilities. The extended decision support system has been validated by its application to assess seasonal influenza risk in the northwest region of Algeria.     

Prioritization of bridges and tunnels in earthquake risk mitigation using multicriteria decision analysis: Application to Lisbon

This paper presents the development of a multicriteria value model enabling the prioritization of bridges and tunnels according to their structural vulnerability and strategic importance for the formulation and implementation of civil protection policies, both for retrofitting and emergency management, in face of seismic events. An interactive structuring process was developed with a group of key-players to carefully define the evaluation criteria and the MACBETH approach was extensively used (i) to facilitate the assessment from the group of the judgmental information necessary to build value functions and (ii) to establish relative weights for the criteria. The model was subsequently explored to prioritize the bridges and tunnels of a zone in Lisbon with high seismic hazard.     

Impact of Number of Interactions,Different Interaction Patterns,and Human Inconsistencies on Some Hybrid Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization Algorithms*

We investigate the impact of the number of human–computer interactions, different interaction patterns, and human inconsistencies in decision maker responses on the convergence of an interactive, evolutionary multiobjective algorithm recently developed by the authors. In our context “an interaction” means choosing the best and worst solutions among a sample of six solutions. By interaction patterns we refer to whether preference questioning is more front‐, center‐, rear‐, or edge‐loaded. As test problems we use two‐ to four‐objective knapsack problems, multicriteria scheduling problems, and multiobjective facility location problems. In the tests, two different preference functions are used to represent actual decision maker preferences, linear and Chebyshev. The results indicate that it is possible to obtain solutions that are very good or even nearly optimal with a reasonable number of interactions. The results also indicate that the algorithm is robust to minor inconsistencies in decision maker responses. There is also surprising robustness toward different patterns of interaction with the decision maker. The results are of interest to the evolutionary multiobjective (EMO) community actively developing hybrid interactive EMO approaches.     

考虑多指标模糊关联的服务制造网络协同绩效评价方法

本文针对服务制造网络伙伴协同绩效评价问题中指标之间具有关联性的特点,给出了一种考虑多指标模糊关联的评价方法。首先,构建了服务制造网络伙伴协同绩效评价的框架和指标体系;然后,通过将模糊语言信息转化为Two-tuple linguistics以及对TAC(Two-Additive Choquet)积分算子进行扩展,对Two-tuple linguistics形式的指标关联信息与评价信息进行处理和集结,从而获得交互性协同和互补性协同两个维度的评价结果。最后,通过一个算例说明了给出方法的潜在应用价值。     

A Multicriteria Outranking Modeling Approach for Credit Rating

Rating models are widely used by credit institutions to obtain estimates for the probabilities of default for their clients (firms, organizations, individuals) and to assess the risk of credit portfolios. Several statistical and data mining methods are used to develop such models. In this article, the potential of an outranking multicriteria decision‐aiding approach is explored. An evolutionary algorithm is used to fit a credit rating model on the basis of the ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité trichotomique method. The methodology is applied to a large sample of Greek firms. The results indicate that outranking models are well suited to credit rating, providing good classification results and useful insight on the relative importance of the evaluation criteria.     

Facilitating bid evaluation in public call for tenders: a socio-technical approach

A specific multicriteria socio-technical approach to facilitating bid evaluation processes is presented and several issues that warrant its use are discussed. Some real-world interventions in international public call for tenders illustrate practical aspects of structuring criteria and creating a computer-based additive value model in direct interaction with Evaluation Committees responsible for bid evaluation, supported by the macbeth approach.     

Two ways to handle dependent uncertainties in multi-criteria decision problems

We consider multi-criteria group decision-making problems, where the decision makers (DMs) want to identify their most preferred alternative(s) based on uncertain or inaccurate criteria measurements. In many real-life problems the uncertainties may be dependent. In this paper, we focus on multicriteria decision-making (MCDM) problems where the criteria and their uncertainties are computed using a stochastic simulation model. The model is based on decision variables and stochastic parameters with given distributions. The simulation model determines for the criteria a joint probability distribution, which quantifies the uncertainties and their dependencies. We present and compare two methods for treating the uncertainty and dependency information within the SMAA-2 multi-criteria decision aid method. The first method applies directly the discrete sample generated by the simulation model. The second method is based on using a multivariate Gaussian distribution. We demonstrate the methods using a decision support model for a retailer operating in the deregulated European electricity market.     

Multicriteria Preference Disaggregation for Classification Problems with an Application to Global Investing Risk*

Mathematical programming and multicriteria approaches to classification and discrimination are reviewed, with an emphasis on preference disaggregation. The latter include the UTADIS family and a new method, Multigroup Hierarchical DIScrimination (MHDIS). They are used to assess investing risk in 51 countries that have stock exchanges, according to 27 criteria. These criteria include quantitative and qualitative measures of market risk (volatility and currency fluctuations); range of investment opportunities; quantity and quality on market information; investor protection (security regulations treatment of minority shareholders); and administrative “headaches” (custody, settlement, and taxes). The model parameters are determined so that the results best match the risk level assigned to those countries by experienced international investment managers commissioned by The Wall Street Journal. Among the six evaluation models developed, one (MHDIS) classifies correctly all countries into the appropriate groups. Thus, this model is able to reproduce consistently the evaluation of the expert investment analysts. The most significant criteria and their weights for assessing global risk investing are also presented, along with their marginal utilities, leading to identifiers of risk groups and global utilities portraying the strength of each country's risk classification. The same method, MHDIS, outperformed the other five methods in a 10‐fold validation experiment. These results are promising for the study of emerging new markets in fast‐growing regions, which present fertile areas for investment growth but also     

MULTICRITERIA OPTIMIZATION: A GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF EFFICIENT SOLUTIONS*

In the context of deterministic multicriteria maximization, a Pareto optimal, nondominated, or efficient solution is a feasible solution for which an increase in value of any one criterion can only be achieved at the expense of a decrease in value of at least one other criterion. Without restrictions of convexity or continuity, it is shown that a solution is efficient if and only if it solves an optimization problem that bounds the various criteria values from below and maximizes a strictly increasing function of these several criteria values. Also included are discussions of previous work concerned with generating or characterizing the set of efficient solutions, and of the interactive approach for resolving multicriteria optimization problems. The final section argues that the paper's main result should not actually be used to generate the set of efficient solutions, relates this result to Simon's theory of satisficing, and then indicates why and how it can be used as the basis for interactive procedures with desirable characteristics.     

An Integrated Framework for Environmental Multi‐Impact Spatial Risk Analysis

Quantitative risk analysis is being extensively employed to support policymakers and provides a strong conceptual framework for evaluating decision alternatives under uncertainty. Many problems involving environmental risks are, however, of a spatial nature, i.e., containing spatial impacts, spatial vulnerabilities, and spatial risk‐mitigation alternatives. Recent developments in multicriteria spatial analysis have enabled the assessment and aggregation of multiple impacts, supporting policymakers in spatial evaluation problems. However, recent attempts to conduct spatial multicriteria risk analysis have generally been weakly conceptualized, without adequate roots in quantitative risk analysis. Moreover, assessments of spatial risk often neglect the multidimensional nature of spatial impacts (e.g., social, economic, human) that are typically occurring in such decision problems. The aim of this article is therefore to suggest a conceptual quantitative framework for environmental multicriteria spatial risk analysis based on expected multi‐attribute utility theory. The framework proposes: (i) the formal assessment of multiple spatial impacts; (ii) the aggregation of these multiple spatial impacts; (iii) the assessment of spatial vulnerabilities and probabilities of occurrence of adverse events; (iv) the computation of spatial risks; (v) the assessment of spatial risk mitigation alternatives; and (vi) the design and comparison of spatial risk mitigation alternatives (e.g., reductions of vulnerabilities and/or impacts). We illustrate the use of the framework in practice with a case study based on a flood‐prone area in northern Italy.     

A multicriteria decision analysis model for faculty evaluation

In the context of increasing demands for social and financial accountability of universities, the required implementation of transparent faculty evaluation systems constitutes a challenge and an opportunity for universities strategically aligning the activity of academic staff with the university goals. However, despite growing interest in the performance appraisal of faculty, only a few reported studies propose models that cover the full range of academic activities and the models in use are typically based on ad hoc scoring systems that lack theoretical soundness. This article approaches faculty evaluation from an innovative comprehensive perspective. Based on the concepts and methods of multiple criteria value measurement, it proposes a new faculty evaluation model that addresses the whole range of academic activities and can be applied within and across distinct scientific areas, while respecting their specificities. Constructed through a socio-technical process, the model was designed for and adopted by the Instituto Superior Técnico, the engineering school of the Technical University of Lisbon. The model has a two-level hierarchical additive structure, with top-level evaluation areas specified by second-level evaluation criteria. A bottom non-additive third level accounts for the quantitative and qualitative dimensions of academic activity related to each evaluation criterion. The model allows (a) the comparison of the performance of academic staff with performance targets reflecting the strategic policy concerns of university management; (b) the definition of the multicriteria value profile of each faculty member at the top level of the evaluation areas; (c) the computation of an overall value score for each faculty member, through an optimisation procedure that makes use of a flexible system of weights and (d) the assignment of faculty members to rating categories.     

Use of Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Weight of Evidence Evaluation

Weight of evidence (WOE) methods are key components of ecological and human health risk assessments. Most WOE applications rely on the qualitative integration of diverse lines of evidence (LOE) representing impact on ecological receptors and humans. Recent calls for transparency in assessments and justifiability of management decisions are pushing the community to consider quantitative methods for integrated risk assessment and management. This article compares and contrasts the type of information required for application of individual WOE techniques and the outcomes that they provide in ecological risk assessment and proposes a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework for integrating individual LOE in support of management decisions. The use of quantitative WOE techniques is illustrated for a hypothetical but realistic case study of selecting remedial alternatives at a contaminated aquatic site. Use of formal MCDA does not necessarily eliminate biases and judgment calls necessary for selecting remedial alternatives, but allows for transparent evaluation and fusion of individual LOE. It also provides justifiable methods for selecting remedial alternatives consistent with stakeholder and decision‐maker values.     

Decision Support by Interval SMART/SWING—Incorporating Imprecision in the SMART and SWING Methods

Interval judgments are a way of handling preferential and informational imprecision in multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). In this article, we study the use of intervals in the simple multiattribute rating technique (SMART) and SWING weighting methods. We generalize the methods by allowing the reference attribute to be any attribute, not just the most or the least important one, and by allowing the decision maker to reply with intervals to the weight ratio questions to account for his/her judgmental imprecision. We also study the practical and procedural implications of using imprecision intervals in these methods. These include, for example, how to select the reference attribute to identify as many dominated alternatives as possible. Based on the results of a simulation study, we suggest guidelines for how to carry out the weighting process in practice. Computer support can be used to make the process visual and interactive. We describe the WINPRE software for interval SMART/SWING, preference assessment by imprecise ratio statements (PAIRS), and preference programming. The use of interval SMART/SWING is illustrated by a job selection example.     

Uses and Misuses of Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in Environmental Decision Making

We focus on a class of multicriteria methods that are commonly used in environmental decision making—those that employ the weighted linear average algorithm (and this includes the popular analytic hierarchy process (AHP)). While we do not doubt the potential benefits of using formal decision methods of this type, we draw attention to the consequences of not using them well. In particular, we highlight a property of these methods that should not be overlooked when they are applied in environmental and wider decision-making contexts: the final decision or ranking of options is dependent on the choice of performance scoring scales for the criteria when the criteria weights are held constant. We compare this "sensitivity" to a well-known criticism of the AHP, and we go on to describe the more general lesson when it comes to using weighted linear average methods—a lesson concerning the relationship between criteria weights and performance scoring scales.     

A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens

We develop a prioritization framework for foodborne risks that considers public health impact as well as three other factors (market impact, consumer risk acceptance and perception, and social sensitivity). Canadian case studies are presented for six pathogen‐food combinations: Campylobacter spp. in chicken; Salmonella spp. in chicken and spinach; Escherichia coli O157 in spinach and beef; and Listeria monocytogenes in ready‐to‐eat meats. Public health impact is measured by disability‐adjusted life years and the cost of illness. Market impact is quantified by the economic importance of the domestic market. Likert‐type scales are used to capture consumer perception and acceptance of risk and social sensitivity to impacts on vulnerable consumer groups and industries. Risk ranking is facilitated through the development of a knowledge database presented in the format of info cards and the use of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to aggregate the four factors. Three scenarios representing different stakeholders illustrate the use of MCDA to arrive at rankings of pathogen‐food combinations that reflect different criteria weights. The framework provides a flexible instrument to support policymakers in complex risk prioritization decision making when different stakeholder groups are involved and when multiple pathogen‐food combinations are compared.     

Multicriteria decision making applied to waste recycling in Brazil

Waste management, like other environmental issues, tends to be a suitable topic for problem solving using multicriteria decision-making techniques when uncertainty is involved. This paper presents two cases where the decision makers had different preferences. In the first case, social agents required an evaluation of different disposal alternatives for plastic waste. In the second case, existing construction and demolition waste recycling facilities required a performance evaluation.