IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/advdac/v13y2019i2d10.1007_s11634-017-0306-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weighted distance-based trees for ranking data

Author

Listed:
  • Antonella Plaia

    (University of Palermo)

  • Mariangela Sciandra

    (University of Palermo)

Abstract

Within the framework of preference rankings, the interest can lie in finding which predictors and which interactions are able to explain the observed preference structures, because preference decisions will usually depend on the characteristics of both the judges and the objects being judged. This work proposes the use of a univariate decision tree for ranking data based on the weighted distances for complete and incomplete rankings, and considers the area under the ROC curve both for pruning and model assessment. Two real and well-known datasets, the SUSHI preference data and the University ranking data, are used to display the performance of the methodology.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonella Plaia & Mariangela Sciandra, 2019. "Weighted distance-based trees for ranking data," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 13(2), pages 427-444, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:advdac:v:13:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11634-017-0306-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11634-017-0306-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11634-017-0306-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11634-017-0306-x?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. Lee, Paul H. & Yu, Philip L.H., 2010. "Distance-based tree models for ranking data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1672-1682, June.
    2. Shih, Yu-Shan, 2001. "Selecting the best splits for classification trees with categorical variables," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(4), pages 341-345, October.
    3. Cook, Wade D., 2006. "Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(2), pages 369-385, July.
    4. Piccarreta, Raffaella, 2010. "Binary trees for dissimilarity data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1516-1524, June.
    5. Amodio, S. & D’Ambrosio, A. & Siciliano, R., 2016. "Accurate algorithms for identifying the median ranking when dealing with weak and partial rankings under the Kemeny axiomatic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 667-676.
    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. Antonella Plaia & Simona Buscemi & Johannes Fürnkranz & Eneldo Loza Mencía, 2022. "Comparing Boosting and Bagging for Decision Trees of Rankings," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 39(1), pages 78-99, March.
    2. Antonella Plaia & Simona Buscemi & Mariangela Sciandra, 2021. "Consensus among preference rankings: a new weighted correlation coefficient for linear and weak orderings," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 15(4), pages 1015-1037, December.
    3. Juan Moreno-Garcia & Benito Yáñez-Araque & Felipe Hernández-Perlines & Luis Rodriguez-Benitez, 2022. "An Aggregation Metric Based on Partitioning and Consensus for Asymmetric Distributions in Likert Scale Responses," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-17, November.

    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. Antonella Plaia & Simona Buscemi & Johannes Fürnkranz & Eneldo Loza Mencía, 2022. "Comparing Boosting and Bagging for Decision Trees of Rankings," Journal of Classification, Springer;The Classification Society, vol. 39(1), pages 78-99, March.
    2. Antonio D’Ambrosio & Carmela Iorio & Michele Staiano & Roberta Siciliano, 2019. "Median constrained bucket order rank aggregation," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 787-802, June.
    3. Yeawon Yoo & Adolfo R. Escobedo, 2021. "A New Binary Programming Formulation and Social Choice Property for Kemeny Rank Aggregation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 296-320, December.
    4. Akbari, Sina & Escobedo, Adolfo R., 2023. "Beyond kemeny rank aggregation: A parameterizable-penalty framework for robust ranking aggregation with ties," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Azzini, Ivano & Munda, Giuseppe, 2020. "A new approach for identifying the Kemeny median ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 388-401.
    6. Antonio D’Ambrosio & Willem J. Heiser, 2016. "A Recursive Partitioning Method for the Prediction of Preference Rankings Based Upon Kemeny Distances," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(3), pages 774-794, September.
    7. Yoo, Yeawon & Escobedo, Adolfo R. & Skolfield, J. Kyle, 2020. "A new correlation coefficient for comparing and aggregating non-strict and incomplete rankings," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1025-1041.
    8. Antonella Plaia & Simona Buscemi & Mariangela Sciandra, 2021. "Consensus among preference rankings: a new weighted correlation coefficient for linear and weak orderings," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 15(4), pages 1015-1037, December.
    9. Cascón, J.M. & González-Arteaga, T. & de Andrés Calle, R., 2022. "A new preference classification approach: The λ-dissensus cluster algorithm," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    10. Chacón, José E. & Fernández Serrano, Javier, 2024. "Bayesian taut splines for estimating the number of modes," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Noelia Rico & Camino R. Vela & Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Irene Díaz, 2021. "Reducing the Computational Time for the Kemeny Method by Exploiting Condorcet Properties," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, June.
    12. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2015. "Checking the consistency of the solution in ordinal semi-democratic decision-making problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PB), pages 188-195.
    13. Ghimire, Ramesh & Green, Gary T. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Poudyal, Neelam C. & Cordell, H. Ken, 2017. "Visitors' Preferences for Freshwater Amenity Characteristics: Implications from the U.S. Household Survey," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 42(1), pages 1-24, January.
    14. Dimitris Tsintsaris & Milan Tsompanoglou & Evangelos Ioannidis, 2024. "Dynamics of Social Influence and Knowledge in Networks: Sociophysics Models and Applications in Social Trading, Behavioral Finance and Business," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, April.
    15. González-Arteaga, T. & Alcantud, J.C.R. & de Andrés Calle, R., 2016. "A cardinal dissensus measure based on the Mahalanobis distance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(2), pages 575-585.
    16. Carmela Iorio & Giuseppe Pandolfo & Antonio D’Ambrosio & Roberta Siciliano, 2020. "Mining big data in tourism," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 1655-1669, December.
    17. Fuchs Sebastian & McCord Yann, 2019. "On the lower bound of Spearman’s footrule," Dependence Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 126-132, January.
    18. Freixas, Josep & Kurz, Sascha, 2013. "The golden number and Fibonacci sequences in the design of voting structures," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 226(2), pages 246-257.
    19. Amaya, Johanna & Arellana, Julian & Delgado-Lindeman, Maira, 2020. "Stakeholders perceptions to sustainable urban freight policies in emerging markets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 329-348.
    20. Andrea Aveni & Ludovico Crippa & Giulio Principi, 2024. "On the Weighted Top-Difference Distance: Axioms, Aggregation, and Approximation," Papers 2403.15198, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.

    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:spr:advdac:v:13:y:2019:i:2:d:10.1007_s11634-017-0306-x. 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.springer.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.