Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ELECTRE Methods: Main Features and Recent Developments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis

Part of the book series: Applied Optimization ((APOP,volume 103))

Abstract

We present main characteristics of ELECTRE family methods, designed for multiple criteria decision aiding. These methods use as a preference model an outranking relation in the set of actions – it is constructed in result of concordance and non-discordance tests involving a specific input preference information. After a brief description of the constructivist conception in which the ELECTRE methods are inserted, we present the main features of these methods. We discuss such characteristic features as: the possibility of taking into account positive and negative reasons in the modeling of preferences, without any need for recoding the data; using of thresholds for taking into account the imperfect knowledge of data; the absence of systematic compensation between “gains” and “losses”. The main weaknesses are also presented. Then, some aspects related to new developments are outlined. These are related to some new methodological developments, new procedures, axiomatic analysis, software tools, and several other aspects. The chapter ends with conclusions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. H. Aissi and B. Roy. Robustness in multi-criteria decision aiding. In M. Ehrgott, J.R. Figueira, and S. Greco, editors, Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, pages 101–139. Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., New York, U.S.A., 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J. Almeida-Dias, J.R. Figueira, and B. Roy. ELECTRE TRI-C: A multiple criteria sorting method based on characteristic reference actions. European Journal of Operational Research, 2009. [doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.10.018].

    Google Scholar 

  3. J. Almeida-Dias, J.R. Figueira, and B. Roy. A multiple criteria sorting method defining the categories by several characteristic reference actions: The ELECTRE TRI-NC methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 2010. Submitted.

    Google Scholar 

  4. S. Andr´e. Evaluation de la Performance non Financi`ere des Entreprises : Apport des M´ethodes Multicrit`ere dAide `ala D´ecision.Th`ese de Doctorat, LAMSADE, Universit´e Paris-Dauphine, Paris, France, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  5. S. Andr´e and B. Roy. Conception et mise en place d’un outil d’´evaluation de la performance environnementale : Le cas des raffineries de la soci´et´e TOTAL. Journal of Decision Systems, 16:335–367, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R. Bisdorff. Concordant outranking with multiple criteria of ordinal significance. 4OR, 2:293– 308, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. Bisdorff, P. Meyer, and M. Roubens. RUBIS: A bipolar-valued outranking method for the choice problem. 4OR, 6:143–165, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D. Bouyssou. Some remarks on the notion of compensation in MCDM. European Journal of Operational Research, 26:150–160, 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. D. Bouyssou and T. Marchant. An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM I: The case of two categories. European Journal of Operational Research, 178:217245, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. Bouyssou and T. Marchant. An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM II: More than two categories. European Journal of Operational Research, 178:246276, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D. Bouyssou, T Marchant, M. Pirlot, P. Perny, A. Tsouki`as, and Ph. Vincke. Evaluation and Decision Models: A Critical Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. D. Bouyssou and M. Pirlot. A characterization of strict concordance relations. In D. Bouyssou, E. Jacquet-Lagr`eze, P. Perny, R. Słowi´nski, D. Vanderpooten, and Ph. Vincke, editors, Aiding Decisions with Multiple Criteria, Essays in Honour of Bernard Roy, pages 121–145. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston, U.S.A., 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Bouyssou and M. Pirlot. Non transitive decomposable conjoint measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 46:677703, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. D. Bouyssou and M. Pirlot. A characterization of concordance relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 167:427–443, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. D. Bouyssou and M. Pirlot. Further results on concordance relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 181:505–514, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D. Bouyssou and M. Pirlot. An axiomatic analysis of concordance-discordance relations. European Journal of Operational Research, 199:468477, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. D. Bouyssou, M. Pirlot, and Ph. Vincke. A general model of preference aggregation. In M. Karwan, J. Spronk, and J. Wallenius, editors, Essays in Decision Making, pages 120–134. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Bouyssou and J-C. Vansnick. Noncompensatory and generalized noncompensatory preference structures. Theory and Decision, 21:251266, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J-P. Brans and Mareschal. PROMETHEE methods. In J.R. Figueira, S. Greco, and M. Ehrgott, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, pages 163–195. Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., New York, U.S.A., 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  20. L. Dias and V. Mousseau. Inferring ELECTRE’s veto-related parameters from outranking examples. European Journal of Operational Research, 170:172–191, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. L. Dias, V. Mousseau, J. Figueira, and J. Cl´ımaco. An aggregation/disaggregation approach to obtain robust conclusions with ELECTRE TRI. European Journal of Operational Research, 138:332–348, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. M. Doumpos, Y. Marinakis, M. Marinaki, and C. Zopounidis. En evolutionary aproach to construction of outranking models for multicriteria classification: The case of the ELECTRE TRI method. European Journal of Operational Research, 199:496–505, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. D. Dubois, H. Fargier, P. Perny, and H. Prade. A characterization of generalized concordance rules in multicriteria decision-making. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 18:751– 774, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. J. Figueira, S. Greco, and R. Słowi´nski. Building a set of additive value functions representing a reference preorder and intensities of preference: GRIP method. European Journal of Operational Research, 195:460–486, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  25. J. Figueira and B. Roy. Determining the weights of criteria in the ELECTRE type methods with a revised Simos’ procedure. European Journal of Operational Research, 139:317–326, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. J.R. Figueira. La Prise en Compte de Crit`eres Multiples en Recherche Op´erationnelle et Aide alaD´`ecision. Habilitation `a Diriger des Recherches (HDR), LAMSADE, Universit´e Paris-Dauphine, Paris, France, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J.R. Figueira, S. Greco, and B. Roy. ELECTRE methods with interaction between criteria: An extension of the concordance index. European Journal of Operational Research, 199(2):496– 505, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. J.R. Figueira and B. Roy. A note on the paper,“ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods, by Wang and Triantaphyllou, omega (2008)”. OMEGA, 37:731–733, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. J.R. Figueira, B. Roy, and V. Mousseau. ELECTRE methods. In J.R. Figueira, S. Greco, and M. Ehrgott, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: State of the Art Surveys, pages 133–162. Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., New York, U.S.A., 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  30. W. Gerhlein. Condorcets paradox. Theory and Decision, 15:161–169, 1983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. W. Goldstein. Decomposable threshold models. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 35:6479, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  32. S. Greco, B. Matarazzo, and R. Słowi´nski. Axiomatic basis of noncompensatory preferences. Communication at FUR X, 30 May-2 June, Torino, Italy, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  33. S. Greco, B. Matarazzo, and R. Słowi´nski. Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 129:1–47, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  34. S. Greco, B. Matarazzo, and R. Słowi´nski. Preference representation by means of conjoint measurement and decision rule model. In D. Bouyssou, E. Jacquet-Lagr`eze, P. Perny, R. Słowi´nski, D. Vanderpooten, and Ph. Vincke, editors, Aiding Decisions with Multiple Criteria, Essays in Honour of Bernard Roy, pages 263–313. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston, U.S.A., 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  35. S. Greco, V. Mousseau, and R. Słowi´nski. Ordinal regression revisited: multiple criteria ranking with a set of additive value functions. European Journal of Operational Research, 191:415–435, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  36. S. Greco, V. Mousseau, and R. Słowi´nski. The possible and the necessary for multiple criteria group decision. In F. Rossi and A. Tsouki`as, editors, Algorithmic Decision Theory, volume 5783 of Lectures Notes on Computer Science, pages 203–214. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  37. S. Greco, B. Pre¸dki, and R. Słowi´nski. Searching for an equivalence between decision rules and concordance-discordance preference model in multicriteria choice problems. Control and Cybernetics, 31:921–935, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  38. S. Greco, R. Słowi´nski, J.R. Figueira, and V. Mousseau. Robust ordinal regression. In M. Ehrgott, J.R. Figueira, and S. Greco, editors, Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, pages 273–320. Springer Science + Business Media, Inc., New York, U.S.A., 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  39. E. Jacquet-Lagr`eze and Y. Siskos. Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision making: The UTA method. European Journal of Operational Research, 10:151–164, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  40. J.C. Leyva-L´opez, L. S´anchez, and M. Contreras. A multicriteria decision support system with an evolutionary algorithm for deriving final ranking from a fuzzy outranking relation. Operations Research: An International Journal, 8:4762, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  41. R. Luce. Semiorders and the theory of utility discrimination. Econometrica, 54:178–191, 1956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. R. Luce, D. Krantz, P. Suppes, and A. Tversky. Foundations of Measurement: Representation, Axiomatization, and Invariance, volume Vol. 3. Academic Press, New York, U.S.A., 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  43. J-M. Martel and B. Roy. Analyse de la signifiance de diverses proc´edures dagr´egation multicrit`ere. INFOR, 44:119–214, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  44. V. Mousseau and L. Dias. Valued outranking relations in ELECTRE providing manageable disaggregation procedures. European Journal of Operational Research, 156:467482, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  45. V. Mousseau, L. Dias, and J.R. Figueira. Dealing with inconsistent judgments in multiple criteria sorting models. 4OR, 4:145158, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  46. V.Mousseau,J.Figueira,andJ.Naux.Unsingassignmentexamplestoinferweightsfor ELEC-TRE TRI method: Some experimental results. European Journal of Operational Research, 130:263–275, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  47. V. Mousseau, J.R. Figueira, L. Dias, C. Gomes da Silva, and J. Cl´ımaco. Resolving inconsistencies among constraints on the parameters of an MCDA model. European Journal of Operational Research, 147:7293, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  48. V. Mousseau and R. Słowi´nski. Inferring an ELECTRE TRI model from assignment examples. Journal of Global Optimization, 12:157–174, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  49. V. Mousseau, R. Słowi´nski, and P. Zielniewicz. A user-oriented implementation of the ELECTRE TRI method integrating preference elicitation support. Computers & Operations Research, 27:757–777, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  50. A. Ngo The and V. Mousseau. Using assignment examples to infer category limits for the ELECTRE TRI method. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 11:29–43, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. P. Perny. Sur le non-respect de laxiome dind´ependance dans les m´ethodes de type ELECTRE. Cahiers du CERO, 34:211–232, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  52. P. Perny. Multicriteria filtering methods based on concordance/non-discordance principles. Annals of Operations Research, 80:137–167, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. M. Pirlot. A common framework for describing some outranking procedures. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 6:86–92, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. B. Roy. How outranking relation helps multiple criteria decision making. In J. Cochrane and Zeleny M., editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, page 179201. University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, SC, U.S.A., 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  55. B. Roy. M´ethodologie Multicrit`ere d’aide `alaD´ecision. Economica, Paris, France, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  56. B. Roy. The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision, 31(1):49–73, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. B. Roy. Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  58. B. Roy. Two concepts of decision aiding. International Journal of Multiple Criteria Decision-Making, 1, 2010. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  59. B. Roy and D. Bouyssou. Aide Multicrit`ere alaD´`ecision : M´ethodes et Cas. Production et Techniques Quantitatives Appliqu´ees `a la Gestion. Economica, Paris, France, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  60. B. Roy and R. Słowi´nski. Handling effects of reinforced preference and counter-veto in credibility of outranking. European Journal of Operational Research, 188(1):185–190, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  61. B. Roy and Ph. Vincke. Relational systems of preference with one or more pseudo-criteria: Some new concepts and results. Management Science, 30(11):1323–1335, 1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. J. Simos. Gestion des D´echets Solides Urbains Genevois: Les Faits, le Traitement, l’Analyse. Presses Polytechniques et Universitaires Romandes, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  63. L. Simpson. Do decision makers know what they prefer?: MAVT and ELECTRE II. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 47:919–929, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  64. R. Słowi´nski, S. Greco, and B. Matarazzo. Axiomatization of utility, outranking and decision-rule preference models for multiple-criteria classification problem under partial inconsistency with the dominance principle. Control and Cybernetics, 31:1005–1035, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  65. R. Słowi´nski and J. Stefanowski. Rough classification with valued closeness relation. In E. Diday, Y. Lechevallier, M. Schrader, P. Bertrand, and B. Burtschy, editors, New Approaches in Classification and Data Analysis, pages 482–489. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  66. R. Słowi´nski and D. Vanderpooten. Similarity relation as a basis for rough approximations. In P.P. Wang, editor, Advances in Machine Intelligence & Soft-Computing, volume Vol. IV, pages 17–33. Duke University Press, Durham, NC, U.S.A., 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  67. R. Słowi´nski and D. Vanderpooten. A generalized definition of rough approximations based on similarity. IEEE Transactions on Data and Knowledge Engineering, 12:331–336, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  68. M. Sugeno. Theory of Fuzzy Integrals and its Applications.Th`ese de Doctorat, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  69. P. Suppes. Measurement empirical meaningfulness and three-valued logic. In Churchman and Ratoosh, editors, Measurement: Definition and Theories, pages 129–143. John Wiley & Sons, New York, U.S.A., 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  70. T. Tervonen, J. R. Figueira, R. Lahdelma, J. Almeida Dias, and P. Salminen. A stochastic method for robustness analysis in sorting problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 192:236–242, 2009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. E. Triantaphyllou. Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods: A Comparative Study. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  72. X. Wang and E. Triantaphyllou. Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. OMEGA, 36:45–63, 2008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CEG-IST, Center for Management Studies, Instituto Superior Técnico, Technical University of Lisbon, Tagus Park, Av. Cavaco Silva, 2744-016, Porto Salvo, Portugal

    Jose Rui Figueira

  2. Faculty of Economics, The University of Catania, Corso Italia, 55, 95 129, Catania, Italy

    Salvatore Greco

  3. LAMSADE, Université Paris-Dauphine, Place du Maréchal De Lattre de Tassigny, F-75 775, Paris Cedex 16, France

    Bernard Roy

  4. Institute of Computing Science, Poznán University of Technology, Street Piotrowo 2, 60-965, Poznán, Poland

    Roman Słowiński

  5. Institute for Systems Research, Polish Academy of Sciences, 01-447, Warsaw, Poland

    Roman Słowiński

Authors
  1. Jose Rui Figueira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Salvatore Greco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernard Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roman Słowiński
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jose Rui Figueira .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Production Engineering, and Management, Technical University of Crete, University Campus, Chania, 731 00, Greece

    Constantin Zopounidis

  2. Dept. Industrial & Systems, Engineering, University of Florida, Weil Hall 303, Gainesville, 32611-6595, USA

    Panos M. Pardalos

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Figueira, J.R., Greco, S., Roy, B., Słowiński, R. (2010). ELECTRE Methods: Main Features and Recent Developments. In: Zopounidis, C., Pardalos, P. (eds) Handbook of Multicriteria Analysis. Applied Optimization, vol 103. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92828-7_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation