Advertisement

The PerronRank family: a brief review

  • Ngoc Mai TranEmail author
Article
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

Ranking by pairwise comparison is a widely used method in economics, decision analysis, operations research, and machine learning. However, the choice of method used for computing the score vector can strongly influence the outcome. We examine three methods for ranking by pairwise comparison: PerronRank ( Principal Eigenvector), HodgeRank, and TropicalRank. In a previous work, we showed that HodgeRank and TropicalRank are limits of PerronRank, hence the methods belong to the same family. On the other hand, the choice of method can produce arbitrarily different rank order. This paper reviews these results, discusses their implications in practice, and states some open problems.

Keywords

Pairwise comparison Decision support system Individual preference Analytic hierarchy process Perron-Frobenius Ranking 

JEL Classification

D70 D71 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by an award from the Simons Foundation (\(\#197982\) to The University of Texas at Austin). The author would like to thank an anonymous referee for the careful reading and helpful suggestions.

References

  1. Akian M, Bapat R, Gaubert S (1998) Asymptotics of the Perron eigenvalue and eigenvector using max-algebra. C R Acad Sci Ser I Math 327(11):927–932Google Scholar
  2. Arrow KJ (1950) A difficulty in the concept of social welfare. J Polit Econ 328–346Google Scholar
  3. Baccelli F, Cohen G, Olsder GJ, Quadrat J-P (1992) Synchronization and linearity: an algebra for discrete event systems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Crawford GB (1987) The geometric mean procedure for estimating the scale of a judgement matrix. Math Model 9:327–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dahl G (2005) A method for approximating symmetrically reciprocal matrices by transitive matrices. Linear Algebra Appl 403:207–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dong Y, Zhang G, Hong W, Xu Y (2010) Consensus models for AHP group decision making under row geometric mean prioritization method. Decis Support Syst 49:281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elsner L, van den Driessche P (2004) Max-algebra and pairwise comparison matrices. Linear Algebra Appl 385:47–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elsner L, van den Driessche P (2010) Max-algebra and pairwise comparison matrices II. Linear Algebra Appl 432(4):927–935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Farkas A (2007) The analysis of the principal eigenvector of pairwise comparison matrices. Acta Polytech Hung 4:99–115Google Scholar
  10. Fürnkranz J, Hüllermeier E (2010) Preference learning. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Gehrlein WV (2006) Condorcet’s paradox. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibbard A (1973) Manipulation of voting schemes: a general result. Econ J Econ Soc 587–601Google Scholar
  13. Hochbaum DS (2006) Ranking sports teams and the inverse equal paths problemGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang X, Lim L-H, Yao Y, Ye Y (2011) Statistical ranking and combinatorial hodge theory. Math Program 127:203–244. doi: 10.1007/s10107-010-0419-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saari DG (2014) A new way to analyze paired comparison rules. Math Oper Res 39(3):647–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGrawHill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Saaty TL (1987) Rank according to Perron: a new insight. Math Mag 60(4):211–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Satterthwaite MA (1975) Strategy-proofness and arrow’s conditions: existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions. J Econ Theory 10(2):187–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Thurstone LL (1927) A law of comparative judgment. Psychol Rev 34(4):273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Tran NM (2012) Hodge rank is the limit of Perron rank. Math Oper Res (to appear)Google Scholar
  21. Tran NM (2013) Pairwise ranking: choice of method can produce arbitrarily different rank order. Linear Algebra Appl 438(3):1012–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tran NM (2013) Topics in tropical linear algebra and applied probability. PhD thesis, University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Association for Evolutionary Economics 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsThe University of Texas at AustinAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations