Preference–Approval Structures in Group Decision Making: Axiomatic Distance and Aggregation

References

• Armstrong RD, Cook WD, Seiford LM (1982) Priority ranking and consensus formation: The case of ties. Management Sci. 28(6):638–645.Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow KJ (1951) Social Choice and Individual Values (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Bogart KP (1973) Preferences structures I: Distances between transitive preference relations. J. Math. Sociol. 3(1):49–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bogart KP (1975) Preferences structures II: Distance between asymmetric relations. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 29(2):254–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Borda JC (1784) Mémoire sur les élections au scrutin. Academie des Sciences, ed. Historie de l’Academie Royale des Sciences pour 1781 (Imprimerie Royale, Paris), 657–665.Google Scholar
• Bordley RF (2009) Combining the opinions of experts who partition events differently. Decision Anal. 6(1):38–46.Link, Google Scholar
• Brams SJ, Sanver MR (2009) Voting systems that combine approval and preference. Brams SJ, Gehrlein WV, Roberts FS, eds. The Mathematics of Preference, Choice and Order (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg), 215–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E, Pedrycz W (2013) A method based on PSO and granular computing of linguistic information to solve group decision making problems defined in heterogeneous contexts. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 230(3):624–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabrerizo FJ, Morente-Molinera JA, Pedrycz W, Taghavi A, Herrera-Viedma E (2018) Granulating linguistic information in decision making under consensus and consistency. Expert Systems Appl. 99:83–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Condorcet M (1785) Essai sur L’Application de L’Analyse a la Probabilite des Decisions Rendues a la Pluralite des Voix (Imprimerie Royale, Paris).Google Scholar
• Cook WD (2006) Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 172(2):369–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook WD, Kress M (1985) Ordinal ranking with intensity of preference. Management Sci. 31(1):26–32.Link, Google Scholar
• Cook WD, Seiford LM (1978) Priority ranking and consensus formation. Management Sci. 24(16):1721–1732.Link, Google Scholar
• Cook WD, Kress M, Seiford LM (1986) Information and preference in partial orders: A bimatrix representation. Psychometrika 51(2):197–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dias LC, Sarabando P (2012) A note on a group preference axiomatization with cardinal utility. Decision Anal. 9(3):231–237.Link, Google Scholar
• Erdamar B, García-Lapresta JL, Pérez-Román D, Sanver MR (2014) Measuring consensus in a preference-approval context. Inform. Fusion 17:14–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erdélyi G, Nowak M, Rothe J (2009) Sincere-strategy preference-based approval voting fully resists constructive control and broadly resists destructive control. Math. Logic Quart. 55(4):425–443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fishburn PC (1973) The Theory of Social Choice (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Hochbaum DS, Levin A (2006) Methodologies and algorithms for group-rankings decision. Management Sci. 52(9):1394–1408.Link, Google Scholar
• Kamwa E (2019) Condorcet efficiency of the preference approval voting and the probability of selecting the Condorcet loser. Theory Decision 87(3):299–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karakaya G, Köksalan M (2020) Estimating the form of a decision maker’s preference function and converging toward preferred solutions. Oper. Engrg. Anal. 52(6):651–664.Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (1976) A group preference axiomatization with cardinal utility. Management Sci. 23(2):140–145.Link, Google Scholar
• Keeney RL (2013) Foundations for group decision analysis. Decision Anal. 10(2):99–186.Link, Google Scholar
• Kemeny JG, Snell LJ (1962) Preference ranking: An axiomatic approach. Kemeny JG, ed. Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences. (Ginn, New York), 9–23.Google Scholar
• Marden JI (1995) Analyzing and Modeling Rank Data (Chapman & Hall, London).Google Scholar
• Moreno-Centeno E, Escobedo AR (2016) Axiomatic aggregation of incomplete rankings. Oper. Engrg. Anal. 48(6):475–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Herrera-Viedma E (2010) A mobile decision support system for dynamic group decision-making problems. IEEE Trans. Systems Man Cybernetics Part A Systems Humans 40(6):1244–1256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pérez IJ, Cabrerizo FJ, Alonso S, Herrera-Viedma E (2013) A new consensus model for group decision making problems with non-homogeneous experts. IEEE Trans. Systems Man Cybernetics Systems 44(4):494–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pennock DM, Wellman MP (2005) Graphical models for groups: Belief aggregation and risk sharing. Decision Anal. 2(3):125–181.Link, Google Scholar
• Wallenius J, Dyer JS, Fishburn PC, Steuer RE, Zionts S, Deb K (2008) Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: Recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Management Sci. 54(7):1336–1349.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang HJ, Dong YC, Chiclana F, Yu S (2019) Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 275(2):580–598.Crossref, Google Scholar