An Evaluation Method with Imprecise Information for Multi-attribute Decision Support

  • Francesc Prats
  • Mónica Sánchez
  • Núria Agell
  • Gaizka Ormazabal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4177)


This paper presents a method using intervals for representing and synthesizing imprecise information for multi-attribute evaluation and decision-making support. An implementation is given for selecting an alternative for a project in a real case in the context of construction in civil engineering. As a previous step to aggregate the available information, a methodology is proposed for summarizing and normalizing values in an intervals context, representing the alternatives by means of rectangles in \(\mathbb R^n\) (products of n finite closed intervals in \(\mathbb R\)). A distance is introduced in the set of rectangles, defining a total order once a reference rectangle is considered. A method is given for the choice of the best alternative based on the comparison of distances to a reference rectangle. The constraints which guarantee consistency are determined and the consistency of the method is established.


Multiobjective Optimization Goal Programming Total Order Imprecise Information Reference Point Method 
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. 1.
    Al-Subhi, K.M.: Application of the AHP in Project management. International Journal of Project Management 19, 19–28 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    González Pachón, J., Romero López, C.: Aggregation of partial ordinal rankings. An interval goal programming approach 28, 827–834 (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kallio, M., Lewandowski, A., Orchard-Hays, W.: An Implementation of the Reference Point Approach for Multi-Objective Optimization. WP-80-35, IIASA, Laxenburg (1980)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H.: Decisions with multiple objectives preferences and value trade-offs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ormazabal, G.: IDS: A new integrated decision system for construction project management. PhD Thesis, Department of Construction Engineering, Technical Univ.of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, Spain (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Romero López, C.: Extended lexicographic goal programming: A unifying approach. Omega, The International Journal of Management Science 29, 63–71 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Romero López, C., Tamiz, M., Jones, D.: Comments on goal programming, compromise programming and reference point method formulations: linkages and utility interpretations-A reply. Journal of the Operational Research Society 52, 962–965 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saaty, T.L.: The Analytical Hierarchy Process. Ed. Willey, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wierzbicki, A.P.: The use of reference objectives in multiobjective optimization. In: Fandel, G., Gal, T. (eds.) Multiple Criteria Decision Making; Theory and Applications. Lecture Notes in Economic and Mathematical Systems, vol. 177, pp. 468–486. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg (1980)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesc Prats
    • 1
  • Mónica Sánchez
    • 1
  • Núria Agell
    • 2
  • Gaizka Ormazabal
    • 3
  1. 1.Dept MA2Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelona
  2. 2.ESADE Universitat Ramon LlullBarcelona
  3. 3.IESE Universidad de NavarraBarcelona

Personalised recommendations