Multiple Criteria Decision Support Software

  • H. Roland Weistroffer
  • Charles H. Smith
  • Subhash C. Narula
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 78)


We present an overview of the current state of multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) decision support software. Many approaches have been proposed in the literature to solve multiple criteria decision-making problems, and there is an abundance of software that implements these approaches. Much of the software is still quasi-experimental, developed by academic researchers to test specific algorithms or to solve a specific problem on an ad hoc basis.


DSS MCDSS software packages 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    P.J. Agrell and R.E. Steuer. ACADEA — A decision support system for faculty performance reviews. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 9(5):191–204, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Y. Aksoy, T.W. Butler, and E.D. Minor. Comparative studies in interactive multiple objective mathematical programming. European Journal of Operational Research, 89:408–422, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    G. Anestis, E. Grigoroudis, E. Krasadaki, N.F. Matsatsinis, and Y. Siskos. Skills Evaluator: A multicriteria decision support system for the evaluation of qualifications and skills in information technology. Operational Research: An International Journal, page To appear, 2004.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    C.H. Antunes, M.J. Alves, A.L. Silva, and J. Clímaco. An integrated MOLP method based package — A guided tour of TOMMIX. Computers & Operations Research, 1(4):609–625, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    C. Bana e Costa and M.P. Chagas. A career choice problem: An example of how to use MACBETH to build a quantitative value model based on qualitative value judgments. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(2):323–331, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    N. Belacel. Multicriteria assignment method PROAFTN: Methodology and medical application. European Journal of Operational Research, 125(1):175–183, 2000.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    V. Belton and T.J. Stewart. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2002.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    P.K. Bergey, C.T. Ragsdale, and M. Hoskote. A decision support system for the electrical power districting problem. Decision Support Systems, 36:1–17, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Beuthe and G. Scannella. MUSTARD User’s Guide. Facultés Universitaires Catholiques de Mons (FUCaM), Mons, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Beuthe and G. Scannella. Comparative analysis of UTA multicriteria methods. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(2):246–262, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J.P. Brans and B. Mareschal. The PROMCALC&GAIA decision support system for multicriteria decision aid. Decision Support Systems, 12:297–310, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    J.P. Brans, B. Mareschal, and P. Vincke. How to select and how to rank projects — The PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24:228–238, 1986.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.P. Brans and P. Vincke. A preference ranking organisation method: The PROMETHEE, method for MCDM. Management Science, 31(6):647–656, 1985.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    D. Buede. Aiding insight. OR/MS Today, 20(2):52–60, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    D. Buede. Aiding insight II. OR/MS Today, 21(3):62–71, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    D. Buede. Aiding insight III. OR/MS Today, 23(4):73–79, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    D. Buede. Aiding insight IV. OR/MS Today, 25(4):56–64, 1998.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    C.T. Chen. Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1):1–9, 2000.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    J. Clímaco and C.H. Antunes. Implementation of a user friendly software package — A guided tour of TRIMAP. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 12(10–11), 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    J. Clímaco, L. Dias, J. Figueira, C. Gomes da Silva, and V. Mousseau. Resolving inconsistencies among constraints on the parameters of an MCDA model. European Journal of Operational Research, 145(2):287–303, 2003.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    G. Colson. The OR’s prize winner and the software ARGOS: How a multijudge and multicriteria ranking GDSS helps a jury to attribute a scientific award. Computers & Operations Research, 27:741–755, 2000.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    J.P. Costa, P. Melo, P. Godinho, and L.C. Dias. The AGAP system: A GDSS for project analysis and evaluation. European Journal of Operational Research, 145:287–303, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    P. Cowling. A flexible decision support system for steel hot rolling mill scheduling. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 45:307–321, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    P. Csaki, T. Rapcsak, P. Turchanyi, and M. Vermes. R and D for group decision aid in hungary by WINGDSS, a Microsoft Windows based group decision support system. Decision Support Systems, 14:205–217, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    P. Czyzak and A. Jaszkiewicz. Pareto simulated annealing — A metaheuristic technique for multiple-objective combinatorial optimization. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 7:34–37, 1998.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    K. Deb and T. Goel. Controlled elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithms for better convergence. In Evolutionary Multi-Crietriaon Optimization. EMO 2001, March 7–9, 2001, Zürich. Proceedings, volume 1993 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    H. Deng, C.H. Yeh, and R.J. Willis. Inter-company comparison using modified TOPSIS with objective weights. Computers & Operations Research, 27(10):963–973, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    M. Despontin, J. Moscarola, and J. Spronk. A user-oriented listing of multiple criteria decision methods. Revue Belge de Statistique, d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle, 23(4):3–110, 1983.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    L. Dias and J. Clímaco. ELECTRE-TRI for groups with imprecise information on parameter values. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(5): 355–377, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    L. Dias, V. Mousseau, J. Figueira, J. Clímaco, and C.G. Silva. IRIS 1.0 software. Newsletter of the European Working Group “Multicriteria Aid for Decisions”, 3(5):4–6, 2002.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    L.C. Dias and J.N. Clímaco. Additive aggregation with variable independent parameters: The VIP Analysis software. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51(9):1070–1082, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    P. Du Bois, J.P. Brans, F. Cantraine, and B. Mareschal. MEDICS: An expert system for computer-aided diagnosis using the PROMETHEE multicriteria method. European Journal of Operational Research, 39:284–292, 1989.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    J. Dyer. A time-sharing computer program for the solution of the multiple criteria problem. Management Science, 19:1379–1383, 1973.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    H. Ehtamo, M. Verkama, and R.P. Hämäläinen. How to select fair improving directions in a negotiation model over continuous issues. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics — Pan C: Applications and Reviews, 29(1):26–33, 1999.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    G.W. Evans. An overview of techniques for multiobjective mathematical programs. Management Science, 30:1268–1282, 1984.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    L. Fang, K.W. Hipel, and D.M. Kilgour. Interactive Decision Making: The Graph Model for Conflict Resolution. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1993.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    A. Fernandez. Software review: Expert choice. OR/MS Today, 23:80–83, 1996.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    X. Gandibleux. Interactive multicriteria procedure exploiting a knowledge-based module to select electricity production alternatives: The CASTART system. European Journal of Operational Research, 113(2):355–373, 1999.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    J. Geldermann and K. Zhang. Software review: Decision Lab 2000. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 10:317–323, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    A.F. Glover, E. Taillard, and D. de Werra. A user’s guide to tabu search. Annals of Operations Research, 41(1–4): 3–28, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. [41]
    A. Goicochea and F. Li. Does it matter which MCDM method you use? — A look at the experimental evaluation of four MCDM decision support systems. In Proceedings of Tenth International Conferene on Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Taipei, Taiwan, volume III, pages 143–165, 1992.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    J. Granat, T. Kreglewski, J. Paczyeski, and A. Stachurski. IAC-DIDAS-N++ modular modeling and optimization system. Technical report, Institute of Automatic Control, Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland, 1994.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    E. Grigoroudis, Y. Siskos, and O. Saurais. TELOS: A customer satisfaction evaluation software. Computers & Operations Research, 27:799–817, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. [44]
    J. Gustafsson, A. Salo, and T. Gustafsson. PRIME Decisions: An interactive tool for value tree analysis. In M. Köksalan and S. Zionts, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Making in the New Millennium, volume 507 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, pages 165–176. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    W. Haerer. Software review: Criterium Decision Plus 3.0. OR/MS Today, 27(1), 2000.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    K.W. Hipel, D.M. Kilgour, F. Liping, and X.J. Peng. The decision support system GMCR in environmental conflict management. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 83(2–3):117–152, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [47]
    C.L. Hwang and K. Yoon. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer Verlag, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    H. Ishibuchi and T. Murata. Multi-objective genetic local search algorithm and its application to flowshop scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 28(3):392–403, 1998.Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    J. Jablonsky. Multicriteria evaluation of alternatives in spreadsheets. In L. Lenart, L. Zadnik Stirn, and S. Drobne, editors, Proceedings of SOR’ 01 Conference, Preddvor, Slovenia. Slovenian Society Infromatika, 2001.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    E. Jacquet-Lagrèze. Interactive assessment of preferences using holistic judgments: The PREFCALC system. In C. A. Bana e Costa, editor, Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, pages 225–250. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  51. [51]
    E. Jacquet-Lagrèze and J. 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
  52. [52]
    P. Jankowski, A. Lotov, and D. Gusev. Multiple criteria trade-off approach to spatial decision making. In J.-C. Thill, editor, Spatial Multicriteria Decision Making and Analysis: A Geographical Information Sciences Approach, pages 127–148. Ashgate, Brookfield, VT, 1999.Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    M. Jarke, M. T. Jelassi, and M. F. Shakun. MEDIATOR: Toward a negotiation support system. European Journal of Operational Research, 31(3):314–334, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. [54]
    A. Jaszkiewicz. Genetic local search for multiple objective combinatorial optimization. Technical Report RA-014/98, Institute of Computing Science, Poznan University of Technology, 1998.Google Scholar
  55. [55]
    A. Jaszkiewicz. A comparative study of multiple-objective metaheuristics on the biobjective set covering problem and the pareto memetic algorithm. Technical Report RA-003/01, Institute of Computing Science, Poznan University of Technology, 2001.Google Scholar
  56. [56]
    J. N. Karaivanova and S. C. Narula. The current state of multiple objective integer programming methods. International Journal of Management and Systems, 14(1):17–46, 1998.Google Scholar
  57. [57]
    L. N. Kiss, J.-M. Martel, and R. Nadeau. ELECCALC an interactive software for modelling the decision maker’s preferences. Decision Support Systems, 12(1994):311–326, 1994.Google Scholar
  58. [58]
    P. Korhonen. VIG — A visual interactive support system for multiple criteria decision making. Belgian Journal of Operations Research, Statistics and Computer Science, 27(1):3–15, 1987.Google Scholar
  59. [59]
    P. Korhonen. A visual reference direction approach to solving discrete multiple criteria problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 34(2):152–159, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. [60]
    P. Korhonen. The multiobjective linear programming decision support system VIG and its applications. In C. Bana e Costa, editor, Readings in Multiple Criteria Decision Aid, pages 471–491. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1990.Google Scholar
  61. [61]
    P. Korhonen. Two decision support systems for continuous and discrete multiple criteria decision making: VIG and VIMDA. In A. Lewandowski, P. Serafini, and M.G. Speranza, editors, Methodology, Implementation and Applications of Decision Support Systems, volume 320 of CISM Courses and Lectures, International Centre for Mechanical Sciences. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1991.Google Scholar
  62. [62]
    P. Korhonen, H. Moskowitz, and J. Wallenius. Multiple criteria decision support: A review. European Journal of Operational Research, 63:361–375, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. [63]
    P. Korhonen and J. Wallenius. A Pareto race. Naval Research Logistics, 35(6):615–623, 1988.Google Scholar
  64. [64]
    M. Kostkowski and R. Slowinski. UTA+ application (v.1.20) — user’s manual. Document de LAMSADE 95, Université Paris-Dauphine, 1996.Google Scholar
  65. [65]
    T. Kreglewski, J. Paczyeski, J. Granat, and A. P. Wierzbicki. IAC-DIDAS-N: A dynamic interactive decision support system for multicriteria analysis of nonlinear models with a nonlinear model generator supporting model analysis. Technical Report WP-88-112, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, 1988.Google Scholar
  66. [66]
    P. Levine and J. C. Pomerol. PRIAM, an interactive program for choosing among multiple attribute alternatives. European Journal of Operational Research, 25:272–280, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. [67]
    A. Lewandowski. SCDAS — Decision support system for group decision making: Decision theoretic framework. Decision Support Systems, 5:403–423, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. [68]
    T. Loetscher. A simple expert system for evaluating sanitation systems in developing countries. EcoEng Newsletter, International Ecological Engineering Society, 2(1):, 2000.Google Scholar
  69. [69]
    T. Loetscher and J. Keller. A multicriterion model for the evaluation of sanitation systems in developing countries. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, to appear.Google Scholar
  70. [70]
    F.A. Lootsma. The REMBRANDT system for multi-criteria decision analysis via pairwise comparisons or direct rating. Technical Report 92-05, Faculty of Technical Mathematics and Informatics, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands, 1992.Google Scholar
  71. [71]
    F.A. Lootsma, T.C.A. Mensch, and F.A. Vos. Multi-criteria analysis and budget reallocation in long-term research planning. European Journal of Operational Research, 47:293–305, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. [72]
    A. Lotov, O. Chernykh, V. Bushenkov, H. Wallenius, and J. Wallenius. Interactive decision maps, with an example illustrating ocean waste management decisions. In T.J. Stewart and R.C. van den Honert, editors, Trends in Multicriteria Decision Making, volume 465 of Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, pages 313–323. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1998.Google Scholar
  73. [73]
    A. Lotov, G. Kamenev, and V. Berezkin. Software for visualization of the feasible set in criterion space in nonlinear MCDA problems. Newsletter of the European Working Group “Multicriteria Aid for Decisions”, 3(4):8–9, 2001.Google Scholar
  74. [74]
    A.V. Lotov, V.A. Bushenkov, A.V. Chernov, D.V. Gusev, and G.K. Kamenev. Internet, GIS and interactive decision maps. Journal of Geographical Information and Decision Analysis, 1(2):118–149, 1997.Google Scholar
  75. [75]
    A.V. Lotov, V.A. Bushenkov, and O.L. Chernykh. Multi-criteria DSS for river water quality planning. Microcomputers in Civil Engineering, 12(1), 1997.Google Scholar
  76. [76]
    A.V. Lotov, V.A. Bushenkov, and G.K. Kamenev. Feasible Goals Method — Search for Smart Decisions. Computing Centre RAS, Moscow, 2001.Google Scholar
  77. [77]
    A.V. Lotov, V.A. Bushenkov, and G.K. Kamenev. Interactive Decision Maps, volume 89 of Applied Optimization. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.Google Scholar
  78. [78]
    B. Mareschal and J.P. Brans. BANKADVISER: An industrial evaluation system. European Journal of Operational Research, 54:318–324, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. [79]
    J.-L. Marichal, P. Meyer, and M. Roubens. On a sorting procedure in the presence of qualitative interacting points of view. Technical report, University of Liege, 2002.Google Scholar
  80. [80]
    B. Matarazzo. Multicriterion analysis of preferences by means of pairwise actions and criterion comparisons (MAPPAC). Applied Mathematics and Computation, 18(2):119–141, 1986.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  81. [81]
    B. Matarazzo. Preference ranking global frequencies in multicriterion analysis (PRAGMA). European Journal of Operational Research, 36(1):36–49, 1988.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  82. [82]
    N.F. Matsatsinis and P. Delias. AgentAllocator: An agent-based multi-criteria decision support system for task allocation. In V. Marik, D. McFarlane, and P. Valckenaers, editors, Holonic and Multi-Agent Systems for Manufacturing, volume 2744 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 225–235. Springer Verlag, 2003.Google Scholar
  83. [83]
    N.F. Matsatsinis and Y. Siskos. MARKEX: An intelligent decision support system for product development decisions. European Journal of Operational Research, 113:336–354, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. [84]
    N.F. Matsatsinis and Y. Siskos. DIMITRA: An intelligent decision support system for agricultural products development decisions. In Proceedings of 3rd European Conference of the European Federation for Information Technology in Agriculture, Food and the Environment (EFITA 2001), Montpellier, France, 2001.Google Scholar
  85. [85]
    D.T. Maxwell. Aiding insight V. OR/MS Today, 27(5):28–35, 2000.Google Scholar
  86. [86]
    D.T. Maxwell. Decision analysis: Aiding insight VI. OR/MS Today, 29(3):44–51, 2002.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  87. [87]
    K. McKean. Decisions, decisions. Discover Magazine, pages 22–31, June 1985.Google Scholar
  88. [88]
    K. Miettinen and M. M. Mäkelä. Interactive multiobjective optimization system WWWNIMBUS on the Internet. Computers & Operations Research, 27(7–8):709–723, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. [89]
    S. K. Mirrazavi, D. F. Jones, and M. Tamiz. MultiGen: An integrated multiple-objective solution system. Decision Support Systems, 36(177–187), 2003.Google Scholar
  90. [90]
    V. Mousseau, R. Slowinski, and P. Zielniewicz. Presentation of the ELECTRE Tri 2.0a software. Newsletter of the European Working Group “Multicriteria Aid for Decisions”, 3(2), 2000.Google Scholar
  91. [91]
    V. Mousseau, R. Slowinski, and P. Zielniewicz. A user-oriented implementation of the ELECTRE-TRI method integrating preference elicitation support. Computers & Operations Research, 27(7–8):757–777, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. [92]
    G. Munda. Multicriteria Evaluation in a Fuzzy Environment. Physica Verlag, Heidelberg, 1995.Google Scholar
  93. [93]
    J. Mustajoki and R.P. Hämäläinen. Web-HIPRE: Global decision support by value tree and AHP analysis. INFOR, 38(3):208–220, 2000.Google Scholar
  94. [94]
    NAIADE Manual & Tutorial. Joint Research Center of the European Commission, Ispra, Italy, 1996.Google Scholar
  95. [95]
    D. L. Olson. Review of empirical studies in multiobjective mathematical programming: Subject reflection of nonlinear utility and learning. Decision Sciences, 23: 1–20, 1992.Google Scholar
  96. [96]
    D. L. Olson. Comparison of three multicriteria methods to predict known outcomes. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(3):576–587, 2001.CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  97. [97]
    D.L. Olson, G. Fliedner, and K. Currie. Comparison of the REMBRANDT system with Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 82:522–541, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. [98]
    W. Ossadnik and O. Lange. AHP-based evaluation of AHP-software. European Journal of Operational Research, 118(578–588), 1999.Google Scholar
  99. [99]
    M. Papadrakakis, N.D. Lagaros, and V. Sevastyanov. A new visualization method of multidimensional numerical models for structural optimization. In K.J. Bathe, editor, Proceedings of Second MIT Conference on Computational Fluid and Solid Mechanics. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2003.Google Scholar
  100. [100]
    K.N. Papamichail and S. French. Decision support in nuclear emergencies. Journal of Hazardous Material, 71:321–342, 2000.Google Scholar
  101. [101]
    V.V. Podinovski. A DSS for multiple criteria decision analysis with imprecisely specified trade-offs. European Journal of Operational Research, 113:261–270, 1999.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  102. [102]
    M.A. Potapov and P.N. Kabanov. SOLVEX — System for solving nonlinear, global and multicriteria problems. In J. Dolézal and J. Fidler, editors, Proceedings of 3rd IFIP WG-7.6 Working Conference on Optimization-Based Computer-Aided Modelling and Design, Prague, Czech Republic, pages 343–347. Institute of Information Theory and Automation, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Prague, 1994.Google Scholar
  103. [103]
    D. Rios Insua, E. Gallego, A. Mateos, and S. Rios-Insua. MOIRA: A decision support system for decision making on aquatic ecosystems contaminated by radioactive fallout. Annals of Operations Research, 95(1–4):341–364, 2000.Google Scholar
  104. [104]
    M. Roubens. Ordinal multiattribute sorting and ordering in the presence of interacting points of view. In D. Bouyssou, E. Jacquet-Lagrèze, P. Perny, R. Slowinski, D. Vanderpooten, and P. Vincke, editors, Aiding Decisions with Multiple Criteria: Essays in Honour of Bernard Roy, pages 229–246. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2001.Google Scholar
  105. [105]
    B. Roy. Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). RIRO, 8:57–75, 1968.Google Scholar
  106. [106]
    B. Roy. ELECTRE III: Un algorithmie de classements fondé sur une représentation floue des préférences en présence de critères multiples. Cahiers du Centre d’Etudes de Recherche Opérationnelle, 20(1):3–24, 1978.MATHGoogle Scholar
  107. [107]
    B. Roy. The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision, 31:49–73, 1991.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  108. [108]
    T.L. Saaty. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
  109. [109]
    A Salo and R.P. Hämäläinen. Preference programming through approximate ratio comparisons. European Journal of Operational Research, 82:458–475, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. [110]
    P. Serafini. Simulated annealing for multiple objective optimization problems. In G.H. Tzeng, H.F. Wang, V. P. Wen, and P.L. Yu, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Making. Expand and Enrich the Domains of Thinking and Application, pages 283–292. Springer Verlag, 1994.Google Scholar
  111. [111]
    M.F. Shakun. Airline buyout: Evolutionary systems design and problem restructuring in group decision and negotiation. Management Science, 37(10):1291–1303, 1991.MATHGoogle Scholar
  112. [112]
    J. Siskos and N.F. Matsatsinis. A DSS for market analysis and new product design. Journal of Decision Systems, 2(1):35–60, 1993.Google Scholar
  113. [113]
    J. Siskos, A. Spyridakos, and D. Yannacopoulos. MINORA: A multicriteria decision aiding system for discrete alternatives. Journal of Information Science and Technology, 2(2):136–149, 1993.Google Scholar
  114. [114]
    Y. Siskos and A. Spyridakos. Intelligent multicriteria decision support: Overview and perspectives. European Journal of Operational Research, 113:236–246, 1999.Google Scholar
  115. [115]
    Y. Siskos, A. Spyridakos, and D. Yannacopoulos. Using artificial intelligence and visual techniques into preference disaggregation analysis: The MIIDAS system. European Journal of Operational Research, 113(2):281–299, 1999.Google Scholar
  116. [116]
    N. Srinivas and Deb. K. Multiple objective optimization using nondominated sorting in genetic algorithms. Evolutionary Computation, 2(2):221–248, 1994.Google Scholar
  117. [117]
    V. Srinivasan and B. Ruparel. CGX: An expert support system for credit granting. European Journal of Operational Research, 45:293–308, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. [118]
    R.E. Steuer. Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation, and Application. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986.Google Scholar
  119. [119]
    R.E. Steuer. The ADBASE multiple objective linear programming package. In J. Gu, G. Chen, Q. Wei, and S. Wang, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, pages 1–6. SCI-TECH, Windsor, England, 1995.Google Scholar
  120. [120]
    L. V. Tavares. A review of major paradigms and models for the design of civil engineering systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 119(1):1–13, 1999.Google Scholar
  121. [121]
    E.L. Ulungu, J. Teghem, P. Fortemps, and D. Tuyttens. MOSA method: A tool for solving multiobjective combinatorial optimization problems. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 8:221–236, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. [122]
    R. van den Honert and F. Lootsma. Assessing the quality of negotiated proposals using the REMBRANDT system. European Journal of Operational Research, 120(1):162–173, 2000.Google Scholar
  123. [123]
    V.S. Vassilev, S.C. Narula, and V.J. Gouljashki. An interactive reference direction algorithm for solving multiobjective convex nonlinear integer programming problems. International Transactions in Operational Research, 8: 1–14, 2001.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  124. [124]
    S. Vrane, M. Stanojevic, V. Stevanovic, and M. Lucin. INVEX: Investment advisory expert system. Expert Systems, 13(2):105–119, 1996.Google Scholar
  125. [125]
    S.F. Weber and B.C. Lippiatt. AutoMan 2.0: Decision support software for automated manufacturing investments. Technical report nistir 4543, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1991.Google Scholar
  126. [126]
    H.R. Weistroffer and S.C. Narula. The state of multiple criteria decision support software. Annals of Operations Research, 72:299–313, 1997.Google Scholar
  127. [127]
    H.R. Weistroffer, S.C. Narula, and J.W. Kim. A comparative evaluation of MADM based DSSs. In Proceedings of Tenth International Conference on Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Taipei, Taiwan, volume II, pages 195–204, 1992.Google Scholar
  128. [128]
    M.M. White and S.W. Palocsay. Software review: Decision Explorer. OR/MS Today, 26(5), 1999.Google Scholar
  129. [129]
    A.P. Wierzbicki and J. Granat. Multi-objective modeling for engineering applications: DIDASN++system. European Journal of Operational Research 113:374–389, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. [130]
    E.G. Zapatero, C.H. Smith, and H.R. Weistroffer. Evaluating multiple-attribute decision support systems. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 6:201–214, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. [131]
    E. Zitzler and L. Thiele. Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A comparative case study and the strength pareto evolutionary algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 3(4):257–271, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. [132]
    C. Zopounidis and M. Doumpos. Developing a multicriteria decision support system for financial classification problems: The FINCLAS system. Optimization Methods and Software, 8(3–4):277–304, 1998.Google Scholar
  133. [133]
    C. Zopounidis and M. Doumpos. PREFDIS: A multicriteria decision support system for sorting decision problems. Computers & Operations Research, 27(7–8):779–797, 2000.Google Scholar
  134. [134]
    C. Zopounidis and M. Doumpos. A preference disaggregation decision support system for financial classification problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 130:402–413, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. [135]
    C. Zopounidis, N.F. Matsatsinis, and M. Doumpos. Developing a multicriteria knowledge-based decision support system for the assessment of corporate performance and viability: The FINEVA system. Fuzzy Economic Review, 1(2):35–53, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Roland Weistroffer
    • 1
  • Charles H. Smith
    • 1
  • Subhash C. Narula
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Business Virginia Commonwealth UniversityVirginiaUSA

Personalised recommendations