Studying the Impact of Information Structure in the PROMETHEE II Preference Elicitation Process: A Simulation Based Approach

  • Stefan Eppe
  • Yves De Smet
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 300)


In the context of a Multi-criteria Decision Aiding process, eliciting a decision maker’s (DM) preferences is a crucial preliminary step. In this paper, we consider the Promethee II outranking method and a aggregation-disaggregation elicitation approach. The DM is asked to provide a set of partial yet rather holistic information about, for instance, his preference of one action over another. The goal is to discover the parameter values of Promethee II that best represents the DM’s preferences. However, the partial information that is provided can take many forms and the goal of this work is to investigate what impact both the nature and the quantity of information – which we will globally call the information structure – has on the quality of the elicitation process’ result. We adopt an empirical approach that aims at providing some insights to guide a future, deeper exploration. However, the results so far already suggest some interesting preliminary conclusions.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R.B., Albadvi, A., Aghdasi, M.: PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research 200(1), 198–215 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brans, J.-P., Mareschal, B.: PROMETHEE methods. In: Figueira, J.R., Greco, S., Ehrgott, M. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys, ch. 5, pp. 163–195. Springer (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eppe, S., De Smet, Y., Stützle, T.: A Bi-objective Optimization Model to Eliciting Decision Maker’s Preferences for the PROMETHEE II Method. In: Brafman, R.I., Roberts, F., Tsoukiás, A. (eds.) ADT 2011. LNCS, vol. 6992, pp. 56–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frikha, H., Chabchoub, H., Martel, J.-M.: Inferring criteria’s relative importance coefficients in PROMETHEE II. International Journal of Operational Research 7(2), 257–275 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Greco, S., Kadziński, M., Mousseau, V., Słowiński, R.: ELECTREGKMS: Robust ordinal regression for outranking methods. European Journal of Operational Research 214(1), 118–135 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kadziński, M., Greco, S., Słowiński, R.: Extreme ranking analysis in robust ordinal regression. Omega 40(4), 488–501 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lahdelma, R., Hokkanen, J., Salminen, P.: SMAA - Stochastic multiobjective acceptability analysis. European Journal of Operational Research (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mousseau, V.: Elicitation des préférences pour l’aide multicritère à la décision. PhD thesis, Université Paris-Dauphine, Paris, France (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Eppe
    • 1
  • Yves De Smet
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer & Decision Engineering (CoDE) DepartmentPolytechnic School of Brussels, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB)BrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations