Ranking procedures by pairwise comparison using random sets and the imprecise Dirichlet model

Applied Mathematics and Computation

Volumn 183, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 394-408

  Utkin, Lev V ^a  

^a SAINT PETERSBURG STATE FOREST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

Belief and plausibility functions; Decision making; Dirichlet distribution; Expert judgments; Imprecise probabilities; Pairwise comparison; Random set theory

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; DATA STRUCTURES; DECISION MAKING; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL METHODS; RANDOM PROCESSES;

DIRICHLET DISTRIBUTION; EXPERT JUDGMENTS; IMPRECISE PROBABILITIES; PAIRWISE COMPARISON; RANDOM SET THEORY;

SET THEORY;

EID: 33845408863     PISSN: 00963003     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.amc.2006.05.069     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. E. Hullermeier, J. Furnkranz, Ranking by pairwise comparison: a note on risk minimization, in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, FUZZ-IEEE-04, Budapest, Hungary, July 2004.
2. E. Hullermeier, J. Furnkranz. Comparison of ranking procedures in pairwise preference learning, in: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knoweldge-Based Systems, IPMU-04, Perugua, Italy, 2004.
3. Cook R.M. Experts in Uncertainty. Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science (1991), Oxford University Press, New York
4. Saaty T.L. Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (1980), McGraw Hill, New York
5. Beynon M., Curry B., and Morgan P. The Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence: An alternative approach to multicriteria decision modelling. Omega 28 (2000) 37-50
6. T. Tervonen, R. Lahdelma, P. Salminen. A method for felicitating and combining group preferences for stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. TUCS Technical Report 638, Turku Centre for Computer Science, Turku, Finland, November 2004.
7. Wong S.K.M., Yao Y.Y., and Lingras P. Comparative beliefs and their measurement. International Journal of General Systems 22 (1993) 69-90
8. G. Regoli. Comparative probability orderings, Documentation Section on the website of the Society for Imprecise Probability Theory and Applications. SIPTA, http://www.sipta.org, 1999.
9. Dempster A.P. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multi-valued mapping. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 38 (1967) 325-339
10. Shafer G. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence (1976), Princeton University Press
11. Walley P. Inferences from multinomial data: learning about a bag of marbles. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 58 (1996) 3-57 with discussion
12. Utkin L.V. Extensions of belief functions and possibility distributions by using the imprecise Dirichlet model. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 154 3 (2005) 413-431
13. Halpern J.Y., and Fagin R. Two views of belief: Belief as generalized probability and belief as evidence. Artificial Intelligence 54 (1992) 275-317
14. Slater P. Inconsistencies in a schedule of paired comparisons. Biometrika 48 (1961) 303-312
15. K. Weichselberger, Elementare Grundbegriffe einer allgemeineren Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung, vol. I Intervallwahrscheinlichkeit als umfassendes Konzept. Physika, Heidelberg, 2001.
16. Luce R.D., and Raiffa H. Games and Decisions (1957), Wiley, New York
17. Augustin T. Expected utility within a generalized concept of probability - a comprehensive framework for decision making under ambiguity. Statistical Papers 43 (2002) 5-22
18. Osei-Bryson K.-M. Supporting knowledge elicitation and consensus building for Dempster-Shafer decision models. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 18 (2003) 129-148
19. Utkin L.V. Probabilities of judgments provided by unknown experts by using the imprecise Dirichlet model. Risk, Decision and Policy 9 4 (2004) 391-400
20. Wilks S. Mathematical Statistics (1962), Wiley and Sons, New York
21. Bernard J.-M. An introduction to the imprecise Dirichlet model for multinomial data. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 39 2-5 (2005) 123-150