ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
advertisementadvertisement
European Journal of Operational Research
Volume 167, Issue 2, 1 December 2005, Pages 427-443
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (404 K)

 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.03.015    How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)
Copyright © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Decision Aiding

A characterization of concordance relations

Denis BouyssouCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author, a and Marc PirlotE-mail The Corresponding Author, b

a CNRS, LAMSADE, Université Paris Dauphine, Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, F-75775, Paris Cedex 16, France b Faculté Polytechnique de Mons, 9, rue de Houdain, B-7000, Mons, Belgium

Received 25 August 2003; 
accepted 11 March 2004. 
Available online 8 June 2004.

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Abstract

The notion of concordance is central to many multiple criteria techniques relying on ordinal information, e.g. outranking methods. It leads to compare alternatives by pairs on the basis of a comparison of coalitions of attributes in terms of “importance”. This paper proposes a characterization of the binary relations that can be obtained using such comparisons within a general framework for conjoint measurement that allows for intransitive preferences. We show that such relations are mainly characterized by the very rough differentiation of preference differences that they induce on each attribute.

Author Keywords: Multiple criteria analysis; Concordance; Outranking methods; Conjoint measurement; Nontransitive preferences

Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. Definitions and notation
3. Concordance relations
3.1. Definition
3.2. Examples
4. A characterization of concordance relations
4.1. Concordance relations without attribute transitivity
4.2. Concordance relations with attribute transitivity
5. Discussion and comments
5.1. Relation to Greco et al. (2001)
5.2. Relation to Fargier and Perny (2001)
5.3. Final comments
Acknowledgements
Appendix A
References

 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.