BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Salvatore Corrente

Salvatore Corrente contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
math.OCcs.CY

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
8works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

8 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Multiobjective Combinatorial Optimization with Interactive Evolutionary Algorithms: the case of facility location problems

We consider multiobjective combinatorial optimization problems handled by means of preference driven efficient heuristics. They look for the most preferred part of the Pareto front on the basis of some preferences expressed by the Decision Maker during the process. In general, what is searched for in this case is the Pareto set of efficient solutions. This is a problem much more difficult than optimizing a single objective function. Moreover, obtaining the Pareto set does not mean that the decision problem is solved since one or some of the solutions have to be chosen. Indeed, to make a decision, it is necessary to determine the most preferred solution in the Pareto set, so that it is also necessary to elicit the preferences of the user. In this perspective, what we are proposing can be seen as the first structured methodology in facility location problems to search optimal solutions taking into account preferences of the user. With this aim, we approach facility location problems using a recently proposed interactive evolutionary multiobjective optimization procedure called NEMO-II-Ch. NEMO-II-Ch is applied to a real world multiobjective location problem with many users and many facilities to be located. Several simulations considering different fictitious users have been performed. The results obtained by NEMO-II-Ch are compared with those got by three algorithms which know the user's true value function that is, instead, unknown to NEMO-II-Ch. They show that in many cases NEMO-II-Ch finds the best subset of locations more quickly than the methods knowing, exactly, the whole user's true preferences.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Scoring from Pairwise Winning Indices

The pairwise winning indices, computed in the Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis, give the probability with which an alternative is preferred to another taking into account all the instances of the assumed preference model compatible with the information provided by the Decision Maker in terms of pairwise preference comparisons of reference alternatives. In this paper we present a new scoring method assigning a value to each alternative summarizing the results of the pairwise winning indices. Several procedures assigning a score to each alternative on the basis of the pairwise winning indices have been provided in literature. However, while all of them compute this score just to rank the alternatives under consideration, our method, expressing the score in terms of an additive value function, permits to disaggregate the overall evaluation of each alternative in the sum of contributions of considered criteria. This will permit not only to rank the alternatives but also to explain the reasons for which an alternative obtains its evaluation and, consequently, fills a certain ranking position. To prove the efficiency of the method in representing the preferences of the Decision Maker, we performed an extensive set of simulations varying the number of alternatives and criteria. The results of the simulations, analyzed from a statistical point of view, show the goodness of our procedure. The applicability of the method to decision making problems is explained by means of a case study related to the evaluation of financial funds.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Multiple criteria decision analysis with the SRF-II method to compare hypotheses of adaptive reuse for an iconic historical building

The paper shows how Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA) tools can support the analyses of six hypotheses of adaptive reuse of an iconic historical building in Turin, Italy (called Stock Exchange) to identify the preferred alternative. In the last two years, the debate around the requalification of the building has been huge for several reasons: it is perceived as a "monument" by citizens; it shows architectural and typological values nationally recognized; it involves public and private interests. In this context, interacting with experts involved in the ongoing discussion, we consider a recently proposed conjunction of four MCDA methods, namely: Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process (MCHP), permitting to consider structural relationships between criteria; ELECTRE III, considering three types of interaction effects between criteria (strengthening, weakening and antagonistic effects); the imprecise SRF method, supplying an easily understandable approach to collect information from the DM; and Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis (SMAA), providing robust recommendation, in terms of rankings and relations of preference, indifference and incomparability between project alternatives, at each level of the hierarchy. We propose a modification of the SRF methodology, called SFR-II, to increase the reliability of the decision aid procedure, which could constitute a significant advance for the same SRF method.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Robust stochastic sorting with interacting criteria hierarchically structured

In this paper we propose a new multiple criteria decision aiding method to deal with sorting problems in which alternatives are evaluated on criteria structured in a hierarchical way and presenting interactions. The underlying preference model of the proposed method is the Choquet integral, while the hierarchical structure of the criteria is taken into account by applying the Multiple Criteria Hierarchy Process. Considering the Choquet integral based on a 2-additive capacity, the paper presents a procedure to find all the minimal sets of pairs of interacting criteria representing the preference information provided by the Decision Maker (DM). Robustness concerns are also taken into account by applying the Robust Ordinal Regression and the Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis. Even if in different ways, both of them provide recommendations on the hierarchical sorting problem at hand by exploring the whole set of capacities compatible with the preferences provided by the DM avoiding to take into account only one of them. The applicability of the considered method to real world problems is demonstrated by means of an example regarding rating of European Countries by considering economic and financial data provided by Standard \& Poor's Global Inc.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Dealing with Interaction Between Bipolar Multiple Criteria Preferences in PROMETHEE Methods

In this paper, we consider the bipolar approach to Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). In particular we aggregate positive and negative preferences by means of the bipolar PROMETHEE method. To elicit preferences we consider Robust Ordinal Regression (ROR) that has been recently proposed to derive robust conclusions through the use of the concepts of possible and necessary preferences. It permits to take into account the whole set of preference parameters compatible with the preference information provided by the Decision Maker (DM).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis for the Choquet integral preference model and the scale construction problem

The Choquet integral is a preference model used in Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA) to deal with interactions between criteria. The Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis (SMAA) is an MCDA methodology used to take into account imprecision or lack of data in the problem at hand. For example, SMAA permits to compute the frequency that an alternative takes the k-th rank in the whole space of the admissible preference parameters, e.g. in case evaluations on the considered criteria are aggregated through the weighted sum model, in the space of weights compatible with the preference information supplied by the Decision Maker (DM). In this paper, we propose to integrate the SMAA methodology with the Choquet integral preference model in order to get robust recommendations taking into account the whole space of preference parameters compatible with the DM's preference information. In case the alternatives are evaluated by all the criteria on a common scale, the preference parameters are given by the capacity expressing the non-additive weights, representing the importance of criteria and their interaction. If the criteria are instead evaluated on different scales, besides the capacity, preference parameters include the common scale on which the evaluations of criteria have to be recoded to be compared. Our approach permits to explore the whole space of preference parameters being capacities and common scales compatible with the DM's preference information.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

The SMAA-PROMETHEE methods

PROMETHEE methods are widely used in Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA) to deal with real decision making problems. A crucial aspect of the classical PROMETHEE methods is the choice of criteria weights. In this paper, we propose to apply the Stochastic Multiobjective Acceptability Analysis (SMAA) to the classical PROMETHEE methods and to the bipolar PROMETHEE methods in order to explore the whole set of weights compatible with some preference information provided by the Decision Maker (DM). A didactic example describes the application of the presented methodology to a student evaluation problem.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2012arXiv

Robust Ordinal Regression in case of Imprecise Evaluations

Robust Ordinal Regression (ROR) is a way of dealing with Multiple Criteria Decision Aiding (MCDA), by considering all sets of parameters of an assumed preference model, that are compatible with preference information given by the Decision Maker (DM). As a result of ROR, one gets necessary and possible preference relations in the set of alternatives, which hold for all compatible sets of parameters or for at least one compatible set of parameters, respectively. In this paper, we extend the MCDA methods based on ROR, by considering one important aspect of decision problems: imprecise evaluations. To deal with imprecise evaluations of some alternatives on particular criteria, we extend the set of considered variables to define necessary and possible preference relations taking into account this imprecision. In consequence, the concepts of necessary and possible preference represent not only all compatible sets of parameters, but also all possible values of the imprecise evaluations of alternatives.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access