GMAA: A DSS Based on the Decision Analysis Methodology - Application Survey and Further Developments - Efficient Decision Support Systems: Practice and Challenges from Current to Future - page 283

achievement of another objective. Therefore, preference trade-offs between differing
degrees of achievement of one objective and another must be taken into account. Also,
real problems are usually plagued with uncertainty, and it is impossible to predict with
certainty what the consequences of each strategy under consideration will be. Formal
analysis is required because it is very difficult to consider the above complexities
informally in the mind.
The GMAA system is a DSS based on an additive multi-attribute utility model that is
intended to allay many of the operational difficulties involved in a decision-making
problem. It has been proven through the paper that it very useful to aid DMs in complex
decision-making from a different nature, from the restoration of aquatic ecosystems
contaminated by radionuclides to the selection of a supplier for cleaning services in an
underground transportation company.
On the other hand, a recent approach to deal with imprecise information in multicriteria
decision-making are the dominance measuring methods, which has been proved to
outperform other approaches, like most surrogate weighting methods or the modification of
classical decision rules to encompass an imprecise decision context. In this paper we have
reviewed the main dominance measuring methods provided by different authors.
6. Acknowledments
The paper was supported by Madrid Regional Government project S-2009/ESP-1685 and
the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science project TIN 2008-06796-C04-02.
7. References
Adelbratt, T. & Montgomery, H. (1980), Attractiveness of Decision Rules, Acta Psychologica ,
Vol. 45, pp. 177-185, ISSN 0001-6918
Ahn, B.S. (2003). Extending Malakooti's Model for Ranking Multicriteria Alternatives with
Preference Strength and Partial Information. IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Management and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans , Vol. 33, pp. 281-287, ISSN
1083-4427
Ahn, B.S. & Park, K.S. (2008). Comparing Methods for Multiattribute Decision Making with
Ordinal Weights. Computers & Operations Research , Vol. 35, pp. 1660-1670, ISSN
0305-0548
Ananda, J. & Herath, G. (2009). A Critical Review of Multi-Criteria Decision Making
Methods with Special Reference to Forest Management and Planning. Ecological
Economics , Vol. 68, pp. 2535-2548, ISSN 0921-8009
Bana e Costa, C.A. (1986). Multicriteria Decision Aid Methodology to Deal with Conflicting
Situations on the Weights. European Journal of Operational Research , Vol. 26, pp. 22-
34, ISSN 0377-2217
Bana e Costa, C.A. & Vansnick, J.C. (2008). A Critical Analysis of the Eigenvalue Method
used to Derive Priorities in AHP. European Journal of Operational Research , Vol. 187,
pp. 1422-1428, ISSN 0377-2217
Barron, F. & Barrett, B. (1996). Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights.
Management Science , Vol. 42, No. 11, pp. 1515-1523, ISSN 1526-5501