IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/jorsoc/v68y2017i11d10.1057_s41274-016-0153-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aggregation of ranked votes considering different relative gaps between rank positions

Author

Listed:
  • Byeong Seok Ahn

    (Chung-Ang University)

Abstract

This paper considers ranked voting systems to determine the rank order of candidates who compete for a limited number of positions. We show that the preferential voting problems based on the data envelopment analysis (DEA) (Wang et al, 2007) can be solved using the extreme points of constraints on rank position importance incorporated in the formulation. This is basically due to the fact that the so-called inverse positive property of the constraints makes it possible to easily find their extreme points. Further, we emphasize that this finding is not restricted to Wang et al’s two linear models, but is also applicable to other DEA-based preferential voting problems, which include the constraints accounting for different relative gaps between rank positions.

Suggested Citation

  • Byeong Seok Ahn, 2017. "Aggregation of ranked votes considering different relative gaps between rank positions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 68(11), pages 1307-1311, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:68:y:2017:i:11:d:10.1057_s41274-016-0153-8
    DOI: 10.1057/s41274-016-0153-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41274-016-0153-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41274-016-0153-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2015. "Extreme point-based multi-attribute decision analysis with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 748-755.
    2. Wade D. Cook & Moshe Kress, 1990. "A Data Envelopment Model for Aggregating Preference Rankings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(11), pages 1302-1310, November.
    3. Carrizosa, E. & Conde, E. & Fernandez, F. R. & Puerto, J., 1995. "Multi-criteria analysis with partial information about the weighting coefficients," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 291-301, March.
    4. Marmol, Amparo M. & Puerto, Justo & Fernandez, Francisco R., 2002. "Sequential incorporation of imprecise information in multiple criteria decision processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 123-133, February.
    5. Hashimoto, Akihiro, 1997. "A ranked voting system using a DEA/AR exclusion model: A note," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 600-604, March.
    6. Y M Wang & K S Chin & J B Yang, 2007. "Three new models for preference voting and aggregation," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(10), pages 1389-1393, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2024. "Ranking voting systems and surrogate weights: Explicit formulas for centroid weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(3), pages 967-976.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2024. "Ranking voting systems and surrogate weights: Explicit formulas for centroid weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(3), pages 967-976.
    2. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    3. Llamazares, Bonifacio & Peña, Teresa, 2013. "Aggregating preferences rankings with variable weights," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(2), pages 348-355.
    4. Tüselmann, Heinz & Sinkovics, Rudolf R. & Pishchulov, Grigory, 2016. "Revisiting the standing of international business journals in the competitive landscape," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(4), pages 487-498.
    5. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "Approximate weighting method for multiattribute decision problems with imprecise parameters," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 87-95.
    6. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2017. "The analytic hierarchy process with interval preference statements," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-185.
    7. Adler, Nicole & Friedman, Lea & Sinuany-Stern, Zilla, 2002. "Review of ranking methods in the data envelopment analysis context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 249-265, July.
    8. Obata, Tsuneshi & Ishii, Hiroaki, 2003. "A method for discriminating efficient candidates with ranked voting data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(1), pages 233-237, November.
    9. Paolo Viappiani, 2024. "Volumetric Aggregation Methods for Scoring Rules with Unknown Weights," Post-Print hal-04440153, HAL.
    10. Madjid Tavana & Mehdi Soltanifar & Francisco J. Santos-Arteaga, 2023. "Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 879-907, July.
    11. Ebrahimnejad, Ali & Tavana, Madjid & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J., 2016. "An integrated data envelopment analysis and simulation method for group consensus ranking," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 1-17.
    12. Fusco, Elisa & Vidoli, Francesco & Sahoo, Biresh K., 2018. "Spatial heterogeneity in composite indicator: A methodological proposal," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-14.
    13. Foroughi, A.A. & Tamiz, M., 2005. "An effective total ranking model for a ranked voting system," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 491-496, December.
    14. G Özerol & E Karasakal, 2008. "Interactive outranking approaches for multicriteria decision-making problems with imprecise information," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    15. Soltanifar, Mehdi & Shahghobadi, Saeid, 2013. "Selecting a benevolent secondary goal model in data envelopment analysis cross-efficiency evaluation by a voting model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 65-74.
    16. Podinovski, V. V., 2004. "Suitability and redundancy of non-homogeneous weight restrictions for measuring the relative efficiency in DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 380-395, April.
    17. Ahn, Byeong Seok, 2015. "Extreme point-based multi-attribute decision analysis with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 748-755.
    18. Salo, Ahti & Punkka, Antti, 2005. "Rank inclusion in criteria hierarchies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 338-356, June.
    19. Gül Özerol & Esra Karasakal, 2008. "A Parallel between Regret Theory and Outranking Methods for Multicriteria Decision Making Under Imprecise Information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 45-70, August.
    20. Yanjin He & Hosang Jung, 2018. "A Voting TOPSIS Approach for Determining the Priorities of Areas Damaged in Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:jorsoc:v:68:y:2017:i:11:d:10.1057_s41274-016-0153-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.