Methodologies and Algorithms for Group-Rankings Decision

References

• Ahuja R. K., Hochbaum D. S., Orlin J. B. Solving the convex cost integer dual of minimum cost network flow problem. Management Sci. (2003) 49(7):950–964Link, Google Scholar
• Ahuja R. K., Hochbaum D. S., Orlin J. B. A cut based algorithm for the nonlinear dual of the minimum cost network flow problem. Algorithmica (2004) 39(3):189–208Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alho J. M., Kangas J. Analyzing uncertainties in experts’ opinions of forest plan performance. Forest Sci. (1997) 43(4Google Scholar
• Ali I., Cook W. D., Kress M. Ordinal ranking and intensity of preference: A linear programming approach. Management Sci. (1986) 32(12):1642–1647Link, Google Scholar
• Arrow K. J.Social Choice and Individual Values (1963) (Wiley, New York) Google Scholar
• Bartholdi J. J., Tovey C. A., Trick M. A. The computational difficulty of manipulating an election. Soc. Choice Welfare (1989) 6(3):227–241Crossref, Google Scholar
• Belton V., Gear T. On a short-coming of Saaty’s method of analytic hierarchies. Omega (1983) 11:228–230Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brans J. P., Vincke Ph. A preference ranking organization method. Management Sci. (1985) 31(6):647–656Link, Google Scholar
• Cardùs D., Fuhrer M. J., Martin A. W., Thrall R. M. Use of benefit-cost analysis in the peer review of proposed research. Management Sci. (1982) 28(4):439–445Google Scholar
• Chandran B., Golden B., Wasil E. Linear programming models for estimating weights in the analytic hierarchy process. Comput. Oper. Res. (2005) 32(9):2235–2254Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen W. W., Schapire R. E., Singer Y. Learning to order things. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. (1999) 10:243–270Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook W. D., Golany B., Kress M., Penn M., Raviv T. Optimal allocation of proposals to reviewers to facilitate effective ranking. Management Sci. (2005) 51(4):655–661Link, Google Scholar
• Duke J. M., Ilvento T. W., Hyde R. A. Public support for land preservation. (2002) . (February), http://www.udel.edu/FREC/PUBS/RR02-01.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Dwork C., Kumar R., Naor M., Sivakumar D. Rank aggregation revisited. Proc. WWW10, Hong Kong (2001) Association IW3C2, Geneva, Switzerland:613–622Google Scholar
• Even G., Naor J., Schieber B., Sudan M. Approximating minimum feedback sets and multicuts in directed graphs. Algorithmica (1998) 20:151–174Crossref, Google Scholar
• Expert Choice (2005) . Retrieved June 1, http://www.expertchoice.comGoogle Scholar
• Fernandez E., Olemdo R. An agent model based on ideas of concordance and discordance for group ranking problems. Decision Support Systems (2005) 39:429–443Crossref, Google Scholar
• Finan J. S., Hurley W. J. A note on a method to ensure rank-order consistency in the analytic hierarchy process. Internat. Trans. Oper. Res. (1996) 3:99–103Crossref, Google Scholar
• Finan J. S., Hurley W. J. The analytic hierarchy process: Can wash criteria be ignored? Comput. Oper. Res. (2002) 29(8):1025–1030Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fuller R., Carlsson Ch. Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: Recent developments. Fuzzy Sets Systems (1996) 78:139–153Crossref, Google Scholar
• Golden B., Wasil E., Harker P.The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies (1989) (Springer, Berlin, Germany) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hao J., Orlin J. B. A faster algorithm for finding the minimum cut in a directed graph. J. Algorithms (1994) 17:424–446Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochbaum D. S.Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems (1997) (PWS Publishing Company, Boston, MA) Google Scholar
• Hochbaum D. S. An efficient algorithm for image segmentation, Markov random fields and related problems. J. ACM (2001) 48(4):686–701Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochbaum D. S. The inverse shortest paths problem. (2002) . Manuscript, University of California, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar
• Hochbaum D. S., Levin A. The k-allocation problem for group ranking with partial lists. Proc. Fourth Workshop on Approximation and Online Algorithms, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (2006) (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Karp R. M., Miller R. E., Thatcher J. W. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. Complexity of Computer Computations (1972) (Plenum Press, New York) 85–103Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keener J. P. The Perron-Frobenius theorem and the rating of football teams. SIAM Rev. (1993) 35(1):80–93Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kemeny J. G., Snell J. Laurie. Preference ranking: An axiomatic approach. Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences (1962) (Ginn, Boston, MA) 9–23Google Scholar
• Roy B.Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding (1996) (Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht, The Netherlands) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saaty T. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psych. (1977) 15:234–281Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saaty T.The Analytic Hierarchy Process (1980) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Saaty T. Rank generation, preservation, and reversal in the analytic hierarchy decision process. Decision Sci. (1987) 18:157–177Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saaty T., Vargas L. Comparison of eigenvalue, logarithmic least squares and least squares methods in estimating ratios. Math. Modeling (1984) 5:309–324Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saaty T. L., Vargas L. G. Diagnosis with dependent symptoms: Bayes theorem and the analytic hierarchy process. Oper. Res. (1998) 46(4):491–502Link, Google Scholar
• Seymour P. D. Packing directed circuits fractionally. Combinatorica (1995) 15(2):281–288Crossref, Google Scholar