Skip to main content

A Fuzzy Borda Count in Multi-person Decision Making

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Advances in Soft Computing ((AINSC,volume 12))

Abstract

Inspired by the Borda count, in this paper we introduce a “fuzzy Borda count”. It is obtained by means of score graduation and normalization processes from its original pattern. The advantages of the Borda count hold, and are even improved, and its drawbacks are somehow corrected, providing an appropriate scheme in multi-person decision making. In addition, these Borda counts are related to approval voting, establishing a unified framework from distinct points of view.

The authors want to acknowledge the financial support of Consejería de Educación y Culture de la Junta de Castilla y León (project VA09/98).

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Arrow, K.J. ( 1951, 2nd ed. 1963): Social Choice and Individual Values. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdek, J.C. — Harris, J.D. (1978): “Fuzzy partitions and relations: an axiomatic basis for clustering”. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 2, pp. 5 — 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezdek, J.C. — Spillman, B. — Spillman, R. (1978): “A fuzzy relation space for group decision theory”. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1, pp. 255 — 268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, D. (1958): The Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, D. (1976): “Partial justification of the Borda count”. Public Choice 28, pp. 1 — 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S.J. — Fishburn, P.C. (1983): Approval Voting. Birkhäuser, Boston. Candeal, J.C. — Indurâin, E. (1995): “Aggregation of preferences from algebraic models on groups”. Social Choice and Welfare 12, pp. 165 — 173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Candeal, J.C. — Indurâin, E. — Uriarte, J.R. (1992): “Some issues related to the topological aggregation of preferences”. Social Choice and Welfare 9, pp. 213 —227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chichilnisky, G. — Heal, G. (1983): “Necessary and sufficient conditions for a resolution of the social choice paradox”. Journal of Economic Theory 31, pp. 68 —87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copeland, A.H. (1951): “A `reasonable’ social welfare function”. Notes from a seminar on applications of mathematics to the social sciences (mimeo), University of Michigan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, M. — Deb, R. (1996): “Transitivity and fuzzy preferences”. Social Choice and Welfare 13, pp. 305 — 318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debord, B. (1992): “An axiomatic characterization of Borda’s k-choice function”. Social Choice and Welfare 9, pp. 337 — 343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, M. (1998): “The Borda count and agenda manipulation”. Social Choice and Welfare 15, pp. 289 — 296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P.C. (1990): “Multiperson decision making: a selective review’, in Kacprzyk, J. — Fedrizzi, M. (eds.): Multiperson Decision Making Using Fuzzy Sets and Possibility Theory, pp. 3 — 27. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Lapresta, J.L. — Llamazares, B. (2000): “Aggregation of fuzzy preferences: some rules of the mean”. Social Choice and Welfare 17, pp. 673 —690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemeny, J. (1959): “Mathematics without numbers”. Daedalus 88, pp. 571 —591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Breton, M. — Uriarte, J.R. (1990): “On the robustness of the impossibility result in the topological approach to Social Choice”. Social Choice and Welfare 7, pp. 131— 140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant, T (1996): Agrégation de relations valuées par la méthode de Borda en vue d’un rangement. Considérations axiomatiques. Ph. D. Thesis, Université Libre de Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchant, T. (2000): “Does the Borda Rule provide more than a ranking?”. Social Choice and Welfare, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean, I. — Urken, A.B. (eds.) (1995 a): Classics of Social Choice. Ann Arbor — The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLean, I. — Urken, A.B. (1995 b): “Independence of irrelevant alternatives before Arrow”. Mathematical Social Sciences 30, pp. 107–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales, J.I. (1797): Memoria Matematica sobre el Calculo de la Opinion en las Elecciones Imprenta Real. Madrid. English version in McLean — Urken (1995 a, pp. 197 — 235).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales, J.I. (1805): Apéndice a la Memoria Matematica sobre el Calculo de la Opinion en las Elecciones. Imprenta de Sancha. Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D.C. (1979): Public Choice. Cambridge University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Münnich, A. — Maksa, G. — Mokken, R.J. (1999): “Collective judgement: combining individual value judgements”. Mathematical Social Sciences 37, pp. 211 — 233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitzan, S. — Rubinstein, A. (1981): “A further characterization of Borda ranking method”. Public Choice 36, pp. 153 — 158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurmi, H. (1981): “Approaches to collective decision making with fuzzy preference relations”. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 6, pp. 249 — 259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, J.R. (1995): “Voting Methods for Multiple Autonomous Agents”. ANZIIS `95, Perth, Australia. Nov. 27, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saari, D.G. (1995): Basic Geometry of Voting. Springer — Verlag. Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Saari, D.G. — Merlin, V.R. (1996): “The Copeland method I: relationships and the dictionary. Economic Theory 8, pp. 51— 76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saari, D.G. — Merlin, V.R. (1997): “A geometric examination of Kemeny’s rule”. Northwestern University, preprint.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1977): “Social Choice Theory: a re-examination”. Econometrica 45, pp. 53 — 89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straffin Jr., P.D. (1980): Topics in the Theory of Voting. Birkhäuser, Boston. Sugden, R. (1981): The Political Economy of Public Choice: An Introduction to Welfare Economics. Oxford: Mart in Robertson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tangian, A.S. (2000): “Unlikelihood of Condorcet’s paradox in a large society”. Social Choice and Welfare 17, pp. 337 — 365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanguiane, A.S. (1991): Aggregation and Representation of Preferences. Introduction to Mathematical Theory of Democracy. Springer — Verlag, Berlin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tanino, T. (1984): “Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making”. Fuzzy sets and Systems 12, pp. 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, H.P. (1974): “An axiomatization of Borda’s rule”. Journal of Economic Theory 9, pp. 43 — 52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, P. (1995): “Optimal voting rules”. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9, pp. 51— 64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L.A. (1971): “Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings”, Information Sciences 22, pp. 203 — 213.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

García-Lapresta, J.L., Martínez-Panero, M. (2002). A Fuzzy Borda Count in Multi-person Decision Making. In: Trzaskalik, T., Michnik, J. (eds) Multiple Objective and Goal Programming. Advances in Soft Computing, vol 12. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1812-3_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-1812-3_5

  • Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-1409-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-1812-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics