A consolidated approach to the axiomatization of outranking relations: a survey and new results

Denis Bouyssou and Marc Pirlot ()

Annals of Operations Research, 2015, vol. 229, issue 1, 159-212

Abstract: Outranking relations such as produced by the Electre I or II or the Tactic methods are based on a concordance and non-discordance principle that leads to declaring that an alternative is “superior” to another, if the coalition of attributes supporting this proposition is “sufficiently important” (concordance condition) and if there is no attribute that “strongly rejects” it (non-discordance condition). Such a way of comparing alternatives is rather natural and does not require a detailed analysis of tradeoffs between the various attributes. However, it is well known that it may produce binary relations that do not possess any remarkable property of transitivity or completeness. The axiomatic foundations of outranking relations have recently received attention. Within a conjoint measurement framework, characterizations of reflexive concordance–discordance relations have been obtained. These relations encompass those generated by the Electre I and II methods, which are non-strict (reflexive) relations. A different characterization has been provided for strict (asymmetric) preference relations such as produced by Tactic. In this paper we briefly review the various kinds of axiomatizations of outranking relations proposed so far in the literature. Then we analyze the relationships between reflexive and asymmetric outranking relations in a conjoint measurement framework, consolidating our previous work. Co-duality plays an essential rôle in our analysis. It allows us to understand the correspondence between the previous characterizations. Making a step further, we provide a common axiomatic characterization for both types of relations. Applying the co-duality operator to concordance–discordance relations also yields a new and interesting type of preference relation that we call concordance relation with bonus. The axiomatic characterization of such relations results directly from co-duality arguments. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Keywords: Multiple criteria decision analysis; Outranking methods; Conjoint measurement; Nontransitive preferences; Concordance-discordance relations (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-015-1803-y (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
Working Paper: A consolidated approach to the axiomatization of outranking relations: a survey and new results (2015)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:annopr:v:229:y:2015:i:1:p:159-212:10.1007/s10479-015-1803-y

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/10479

DOI: 10.1007/s10479-015-1803-y

Access Statistics for this article

Annals of Operations Research is currently edited by Endre Boros

More articles in Annals of Operations Research from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().