Arrow's theorem, multi-criteria decision problems and multi-attribute preferences in engineering design

Research in Engineering Design

Volumn 16, Issue 1-2, 2005, Pages 42-56

  Franssen, Maarten ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Arrow's theorem; Evaluation methods; Multi attribute preference theory; Multi criteria decision making

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; PROBLEM SOLVING; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; THEOREM PROVING;

ARROW'S THEOREM; EVALUATION METHODS; MULTI-ATTRIBUTE PREFERENCE THEORY; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

EID: 27744497699     PISSN: 09349839     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00163-004-0057-5     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Anand P (1993) Foundations of rational choice under risk. Clarendon Press, Oxford
2. Arrow KJ (1950) A difficulty in the concept of social welfare. J Polit Econ 58(4):328-346
3. Arrow KJ (1963) Social choice and individual values, 2nd edn. Yale University Press, New Haven
4. Arrow KJ, Raynaud H (1986) Social choice and multicriterion decision-making. MIT, Cambridge
5. Cross N (1989) Engineering design methods. Wiley, Chichester
6. Dym CL, Wood WH, Scott MJ (2002) Rank ordering engineering designs: pairwise comparison charts and Bords counts. Res Eng Des 13(4):236-242
7. Fishburn PC (1970) Utility theory for decision making. Wiley, New York
8. Hazelrigg GA (1996) The implication of Arrow's impossibility theorem on approaches to optimal engineering design. ASME J Mech Des 118(2):161-164
9. Hylland, A (1980) Aggregation procedure for cardinal preferences: a comment. Econometrica 48(2):539-542
10. Kalai E, Schmeidler D (1977) Aggregation procedure for cardinal preferences: a formulation and proof of Samuelson's impossibility conjecture. Econometrica 45(6): 1431-1438
11. Keeney RL, Raiffa H (1976) Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. Wiley, New York
12. Krantz DH, Luce RD, Suppes P, Tversky A (1971) Foundations of measurement, vol 1, Additive and polynomial representations. Academic, San Diego
13. Locascio A, Thurston DL (1992) Multiattribute optimal design of structural dynamic systems, In: Design Theory and Methodology DTM '92: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on design theory and methodology, Scottsdale, Arizona, September 13-16, 1992. ASME Design Engineering Series, vol 42 ASME, New York, pp 229-236
14. Mas-Colell A, Sonnenschein HF (1972) General possibility theorem for group decisions. Rev Econ Stud 39(2): 185-192
15. May KO (1952) A set of independent, necessary and sufficient conditions for simple majority decision. Econometrica 20(4):680-684
16. Osborne DK (1976) Irrelevant alternatives and social welfare. Econometrica 44(5):1001-1015
17. Pugh S (1991) Total design: integrated methods for successful product engineering. Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
18. Roozenburg NFM, Eekels J (1995) Product design: fundamentals and methods. Wiley, Chichester
19. Scott MJ, Antonsson EK (1999) Arrow's theorem and engineering design decision making. Res Eng Des 11(4):218-228
20. Sen AK (1970) Collective choice and social welfare. Holden-Day, San Francisco
21. Starkey CV (1992) Engineering design decisions. Edward Arnold, London
22. Thurston DL (1991) A formal method for subjective design evaluation with multiple attributes. Res Eng Des 3(2):105-122
23. Thurston DL, Liu T (1991) Design evaluation of multiple attributes under uncertainty. Int J Syst Automat: Res Appl 1(2): 143-159
24. Young HP, Levenglick A (1978) A consistent extension of Condorcet's election principle. SIAM J Appl Math 35(2):285-300