Paper detail

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.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.