Related Research Articles
Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) or multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a sub-discipline of operations research that explicitly evaluates multiple conflicting criteria in decision making. Conflicting criteria are typical in evaluating options: cost or price is usually one of the main criteria, and some measure of quality is typically another criterion, easily in conflict with the cost. In purchasing a car, cost, comfort, safety, and fuel economy may be some of the main criteria we consider – it is unusual that the cheapest car is the most comfortable and the safest one. In portfolio management, managers are interested in getting high returns while simultaneously reducing risks; however, the stocks that have the potential of bringing high returns typically carry high risk of losing money. In a service industry, customer satisfaction and the cost of providing service are fundamental conflicting criteria.
Decision analysis (DA) is the discipline comprising the philosophy, methodology, and professional practice necessary to address important decisions in a formal manner. Decision analysis includes many procedures, methods, and tools for identifying, clearly representing, and formally assessing important aspects of a decision; for prescribing a recommended course of action by applying the maximum expected-utility axiom to a well-formed representation of the decision; and for translating the formal representation of a decision and its corresponding recommendation into insight for the decision maker, and other corporate and non-corporate stakeholders.
In the theory of decision making, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), also analytical hierarchy process, is a structured technique for organizing and analyzing complex decisions, based on mathematics and psychology. It was developed by Thomas L. Saaty in the 1970s; Saaty partnered with Ernest Forman to develop Expert Choice software in 1983, and AHP has been extensively studied and refined since then. It represents an accurate approach to quantifying the weights of decision criteria. Individual experts’ experiences are utilized to estimate the relative magnitudes of factors through pair-wise comparisons. Each of the respondents compares the relative importance of each pair of items using a specially designed questionnaire.
Pairwise comparison generally is any process of comparing entities in pairs to judge which of each entity is preferred, or has a greater amount of some quantitative property, or whether or not the two entities are identical. The method of pairwise comparison is used in the scientific study of preferences, attitudes, voting systems, social choice, public choice, requirements engineering and multiagent AI systems. In psychology literature, it is often referred to as paired comparison.
Multi-attribute global inference of quality (MAGIQ) is a multi-criteria decision analysis technique. MAGIQ is based on a hierarchical decomposition of comparison attributes and rating assignment using rank order centroids.
In decision theory, the evidential reasoning approach (ER) is a generic evidence-based multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach for dealing with problems having both quantitative and qualitative criteria under various uncertainties including ignorance and randomness. It has been used to support various decision analysis, assessment and evaluation activities such as environmental impact assessment and organizational self-assessment based on a range of quality models.
Decision-making software is software for computer applications that help individuals and organisations make choices and take decisions, typically by ranking, prioritizing or choosing from a number of options.
Robust decision-making (RDM) is an iterative decision analytics framework that aims to help identify potential robust strategies, characterize the vulnerabilities of such strategies, and evaluate the tradeoffs among them. RDM focuses on informing decisions under conditions of what is called "deep uncertainty", that is, conditions where the parties to a decision do not know or do not agree on the system models relating actions to consequences or the prior probability distributions for the key input parameters to those models.
The decision-making paradox is a phenomenon related to decision-making and the quest for determining reliable decision-making methods. It was first described by Triantaphyllou, and has been recognized in the related literature as a fundamental paradox in multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) and decision analysis since then.
In decision-making, a rank reversal is a change in the rank ordering of the preferability of alternative possible decisions when, for example, the method of choosing changes or the set of other available alternatives changes. The issue of rank reversals lies at the heart of many debates in decision-making and multi-criteria decision-making, in particular.
Potentially All Pairwise RanKings of all possible Alternatives (PAPRIKA) is a method for multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) or conjoint analysis, as implemented by decision-making software and conjoint analysis products 1000minds and MeenyMo.
Analytica is a visual software developed by Lumina Decision Systems for creating, analyzing and communicating quantitative decision models. It combines hierarchical influence diagrams for visual creation and view of models, intelligent arrays for working with multidimensional data, Monte Carlo simulation for analyzing risk and uncertainty, and optimization, including linear and nonlinear programming. Its design, especially its influence diagrams and treatment of uncertainty, is based on ideas from the field of decision analysis. As a computer language, it combines a declarative (non-procedural) structure for referential transparency, array abstraction, and automatic dependency maintenance for efficient sequencing of computation.
Logical Decisions is decision-making software that is based on multi-criteria decision making.
Expert Choice is decision-making software that is based on multi-criteria decision making.
Decision Lens is online decision-making software that is based on multi-criteria decision making.
D-Sight is a company that specializes in decision support software and associated services in the domains of project prioritization, supplier selection and collaborative decision-making. It was founded in 2010 as a spin-off from the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB). Their headquarters are located in Brussels, Belgium.
DEX is a qualitative multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method for decision making and is implemented in DEX software. This method was developed by a research team led by Bohanec, Bratko, and Rajkovič. The method supports decision makers in making complex decisions based on multiple, possibly conflicting, attributes. In DEX, all attributes are qualitative and can take values represented by words, such as “low” or “excellent”. Attributes are generally organized in a hierarchy. The evaluation of decision alternatives is carried out by utility functions, which are represented in the form of decision rules. All attributes are assumed to be discrete. Additionally, they can be preferentially ordered, so that a higher ordinal value represents a better preference.
Super Decisions is decision-making software which works based on two multi-criteria decision making methods.
Ernest Forman is an American scholar and academic. He is a Professor of Decision Sciences at the George Washington University's School of Business. He is a co-founder, along with Thomas Saaty, of Expert Choice and developed the first commercial implementation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process.
Ordinal priority approach (OPA) is a multiple-criteria decision analysis method that aids in solving the group decision-making problems based on preference relations.
References
- ↑ Saaty, T. L. (1980). "The Analytic Hierarchy Process". McGraw-Hill: New York.
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ↑ Edwards, W.; Barron, F. H. (1994). "SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 60 (3): 306. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1087.
- ↑ Edwards, W. (1977). "How to use multiattribute utility measurement for social decision making". IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 7 (5): 326–340. doi:10.1109/tsmc.1977.4309720. S2CID 24173951.
- ↑ Esawi, A. M. K.; Farag, M. M. (2007). "Carbon nanotube reinforced composites: Potential and current challenges". Materials & Design. 28 (9): 2394. doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2006.09.022.
- ↑ Yatsalo, B. I.; Kiker, G. A.; Kim, J.; Bridges, T. S.; Seager, T. P.; Gardner, K.; Satterstrom, F. K.; Linkov, I. (2007). "Application of Multicriteria Decision Analysis Tools to Two Contaminated Sediment Case Studies". Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 3 (2): 223–233. doi:10.1897/IEAM_2006-036.1. PMID 17477290. S2CID 30001126.
- ↑ Strager, M. P.; Rosenberger, R. S. (2006). "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA". Ecological Economics. 58: 79–92. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.05.024.
- ↑ Rauscher, H. M.; Lloyd, F. T.; Loftis, D. L.; Twery, M. J. (2000). "A practical decision-analysis process for forest ecosystem management". Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 27 (1–3): 195–226. doi:10.1016/S0168-1699(00)00108-3.
- ↑ Haerer, W. (2000), "Software review: Criterium Decision Plus 3.0.", OR/MS Today, vol. 27, no. 1, retrieved 2012-11-19
 | This business software article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |