Abstract
Some general problems concerned with the choice of a method of group judgement for expert opinions given in the form of preference orders are discussed. A special attention is paid to Kemeny’s median and its modification proposed by B.G. Litvak, because of their important properties. Basic notions related to those methods are given. Heuristic algorithms for computing a median for both cases under consideration are proposed. Numerical examples illustrating the application of these algorithms are presented. A real-life example is also described.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aizerman M. and F. Aleskerov. Theory of Choice. North Holland, Amsterdam-New York-Tokyo, 1995.
Black D. The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1958.
de Borda J-C. Memoire sur les elections au Scrutin Histoire de l’Academie Royale des Sciences 1781.
Le Breton M. and M. Truchon. A Borda measure for social choice functions. Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 34, 1997.
de Condorcet M. Essai sur l’Application de l’Analyse à la Probabilité des Rendues à la Pluralité des Voix. Paris 1785.
Bury H., Petriczek G. and D. Wagner. Determining of group opinion with Kemeny’s median method (in Polish). In: Preference Modelling and Risk’ 99, ed. T. Trzaskalik, Katowice 1999.
Bury H. and D. Wagner. The use of Kemeny’s median for group decision making. Integer programming approach. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, Migdzyzdroje, 28–31 August 2000.
Kelly J.S. Arrow impossibility theorems. Academic Press, New York, 1978.
Kemeny J. Mathematics without numbers, Daedalus 88, 1959.
Kemeny J. and L. Snell. Mathematical Models in the Social Sciences. Ginn. Boston 1960.
Litvak B.G. Expert Information. Methods of acquisition and analysis (in Russian). Radio and Communication, Moscow 1982.
Michaud P. The true rule of the Marquis de Condorcet. In: Compromise, Negotiation and Group Decision, eds. B.R.Munier, M.F.Shakun, D.Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht 1988.
Nurmi H. Comparing voting systems, Dordrecht, D.Reidel, 1987.
Nurmi H. Some techniques of preference profile analysis. Paper presented at NPO meeting on “Power and Fairness”, Bad Segeberg, September 3–6, 2000.
Nurmi H. Voting Paradoxes and How to Deal with Them. Springer Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1992.
Nurmi H. Voting procedures: a summary analysis. British Journal of Political Science, vol. 13, 1983.
Saari D.G. Basic Geometry of Voting. Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, New York, 1995.
Saari D.G. Explaining positional voting paradoxes I. The simple case. NU Center for Mathematical Economy, discussion paper No. 1179, January 1997.
Saari D.G. and V.R. Merlin. A geometric examination of Kemeny’s rule. Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17, 2000.
Slater P. Inconsistencies in a schedule of paired comparisons. Biometrica vol. 48, 1961.
Young H.P. and A. Levenglick. A consistent extension of Condorcet’s election principle. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 35, no 2, September 1978.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bury, H., Wagner, D. (2003). Application of Kemeny’s Median for Group Decision Support. In: Yu, X., Kacprzyk, J. (eds) Applied Decision Support with Soft Computing. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, vol 124. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37008-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-37008-6_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-53534-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-37008-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive