A Report on the Study of the Portuguese Navy Case

  • Marc Pirlot
Conference paper


As author of this report and participant to the Summer School, I have to make a preliminary remark. In writing the present report, I tried to restate the atmosphere and outline the main trends in the work done on the Navy case rather than provide an exhaustive account. This can maybe result in a subjective presentation, but I have paid attention to using the «I» pronoun as soon as I was aware of expressing my own views on some point. Moreover, as written records of about half of the working groups activity were not available, I had to invoke my personal memories to fill in the gaps. I hope I did not forget too many important things nor I did (too much) distort the rest. Anyway, I am asking for indulgence both from the participants and the reader.


Analytic Hierarchy Process Ratio Scale Pairwise Comparison Matrix Personal Memory Expert Choice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bana e Costa, C.A. and Rodrigues, J.C. (1990), “Presentation of the school case-study: evaluation of personnel — how to rank officers for promotion?”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  2. Belton, V. and Vickers, S. (1990), “Use of a simple multi- attribute value function incorporating visual interactive sensitivity analysis”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  3. Forman, E.H. (1990), “Multi criteria decision making and the analytic hierarchy process”, in this volume.,Google Scholar
  4. Jacquet-Lagrèze, E. (1990), “Interactive assessment of preferences using holistic judgments — the PREFCALC system”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  5. Janssen, R., Nijkamp, P. and Rietveld, P. (1990), “Qualitative multicriteria methods in the Netherlands”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  6. Matarazzo, B. (1990), “A pairwise criterion comparison approach: the MAPPAC and PRAGMA methods”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  7. Pastijn, H. and Leysen, J. (1989), “Constructing an outranking relation with ORESTE”, Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 12 (10/11), 1255–1268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Roubens, M. (1982), “Preference relations on actions and criteria in multi-criteria decision making”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 10 (1), 51–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Roy, B. (1990), “The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  10. Vanderpooten, D. (1990), “The construction of prescriptions in outranking methods”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  11. Vansnick, J.-C. (1990), “Measurement theory and decision aid”, in this volume.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Pirlot
    • 1
  1. 1.Université Libre de BruxellesBelgium

Personalised recommendations