Pairwise comparisons based non-numerical ranking

Fundamenta Informaticae

Volumn 94, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 197-213

  Janicki, Ryszard ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BINARY RELATION; PAIR-WISE COMPARISON;

EID: 70349161154     PISSN: 01692968     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/FI-2009-126     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arrow K. J., Social Choice and Individual Values, J. Wiley, New York 1951.
2. Cowan, N., The magical number 4 in short-term memory. A reconsideration of mental storage capacity, Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 24 (2001), 87-185.
3. David H. A., The Method of Paired Comparisons, Oxford University Press, New York 1988.
4. Dyer J. S., Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Sci., 36 (1990) 244-58.
5. Fechner G. T., Elemente der Psychophysik, Breitkopf und Ḧartel, Leipzig 1860.
6. Fishburn, P. C., Interval Orders and Interval Graphs, J. Wiley, New York 1985.
7. Fishburn, P. C., GehrleinW. V., A comparative analysis of methods for constructing weak orders from partial orders, J. Math. Sociol. 4 (1975), 93-102.
8. French S., Decision Theory, Ellis Horwood, New York 1986.
9. Janicki R., Pairwise Comparisons, Incomparability and Partial Orders, Proc. of ICEIS'2007 (Int. Conference on Enterprise Information Systems), Vol. 2 (Artificial Intelligence and Decision Support System), Funchal, Portugal 2007, pp. 296-302.
10. Janicki R., Ranking with Partial Orders and Pairwise Comparisons, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5009, Springer 2008, pp. 442-451.
11. Janicki R., Some Remarks on Approximations of Arbitrary Binary Relations by Partial Orders, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5306, Springer 2008, pp. 81-91.
12. Janicki R., On Rough Sets with Structures and Properties, to appear, 2009.
13. Janicki R., Koczkodaj W. W., Weak Order Approach to Group Ranking, Computers Math. Applic., 32, 2 (1996) 51-59.
14. Janicki R., KoczkodajW. W., A Weak Order Solution to a Group Ranking and Consistency-Driven Pairwise Comparisons, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 94 (1998) 227-241.
15. Koczkodaj W. W., A new definition of consistency of pairwise comparisons, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 18 (1993) 79-84.
16. nd Ed., North Holland 1976.
17. Marquis de Condorcet, Essai sur l'application de l'analyse a la probabilite des decisions rendue a la pluralite des voix, Paris 1785 (see [1]).
18. Pawlak Z., Rought Sets, International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, 34 (1982) 557-590.
19. Pawlak Z., Rough Sets, Kluwer, Dordrecht 1991.
20. Rosen K. H., Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications, McGraw-Hill, New York 1999.
21. Saaty T. L., A Scaling Methods for Priorities in Hierarchical Structure, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15 (1977) 234-281.
22. Saaty T. L., Axiomatic Foundations of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Science, 32, 7 (1986) 841-855.
23. Skowron A., Stepaniuk J., Approximation of relations. In: W. Ziarko (ed.), Rough Sets, Fuzzy Sets and Knowledge Discovery, Springer 1994, London, pp. 161-166.
24. Skowron A., Stepaniuk J., Tolarence approximation spaces, Fundamenta Informaticae, 27 (1996) 245-253.
25. Schröder E., Algebra der Logik, Teuber, Leipzig 1895.
26. Thurstone L. L., A Law of Comparative Judgments, Psychol. Reviews, 34 (1927) 273-286.
27. Yao Y. Y., Two views of the theory of rough sets in finite universes, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 15 (1996), 291-317.
28. Yao Y. Y., Wang, T., On Rough Relations: An Alternative Formulations, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1711, Springer 1999, pp. 82-91.