Add or Multiply? A Tutorial on Ranking and Choosing with Multiple Criteria

References

• Aczel J, Roberts FS (1989) On the possible merging functions. Math. Soc. Sci. 17:205–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aczel J, Saaty TL (1983) Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements. J. Math. Psych. 27(1):93–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming PJ, Wallace JJ (1986) How not to lie with statistics: The correct way to summarize benchmark results. Comms. ACM 29:218–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hillier FS, Lieberman GJ (2010) Introduction to Operations Research, 9th ed. (McGraw Hill, Boston).Google Scholar
• Kondraske GV (2011) General systems performance theory and its application to understanding complex system performance. Inform. Knowledge Systems Management 10(1–4):235–259.Google Scholar
• Kondraske GV, Stewart RM (2006) Quantitative characterization of disease severity in diseases with complex symptom profiles. Proc. 28th Int. Conf. IEEE Engrg. Medicine Bio. Soc. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lootsma FA (1996) A model for the relative importance of the criteria in the multiplicative AHP and SMART. EJOR 94:467–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mayfield University Consultants (2012) Complete university guide—business. Retrieved June 2, 2013, http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings?s=Business+Studies.Google Scholar
• Pavlicic DM (2000) Normalization of attribute values in MADM violates the conditions of consistent choice IV, and DI and α. Yugoslav J. Oper. Res. 10(1) :109–122.Google Scholar
• Pomerol J-C, Barba-Romero S (2000) Multicriterion Decision in Management-Principles and Practice (Kluwer Academic, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell SG, Baker KR (2011) Management Science: The Art of Modeling with Spreadsheets, 3rd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• Roberts FS (2009) Limitations on conclusions using scales of measurement. Pollock SMet al., eds. Oper. Res. Public Sector, Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 6 (North Holland, Amsterdam), 621–671.Google Scholar
• Sagar AD, Najam A (1998) The human development index: A critical review. Ecological Econom. 25:249–264.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tofallis C (2012) A different approach to university rankings. Higher Ed. 63(1):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tofallis C (2013) An automatic-democratic approach to weight setting for the new human development index. J. Population Econom. 26(4):1325–1345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2010) Human Development Report 2010: The Real Wealth of Nations (Palgrave Macmillan, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wierzbicki AP (2007) Reference point approaches and objective ranking. Branke J, Deb K, Miettinen K, Slowinski R, eds. Practical Approaches to Multi-Objective Optimization, http://drops.dagstuhl.de/portals/index.php?semnr=06501.Google Scholar
• Yoon KP, Hwang C-L (1995) Multiple Attribute Decision Making (Sage Publications, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zeleny M (1982) Multiple Criteria Decision Making (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar