Abstract (EN)

ELECTRE TRI is a well-known method to assign a set of alternatives to a set of predefined categories, considering multiple criteria. Using this method requires setting many parameters, which is often a difficult task. We consider the case where the decision makers (DMs) in the decision process are unsure of which values should each parameter take, which may result from uncertain, imprecise or inaccurately determined information, as well as from lack of consensus among them. This paper discusses the synergy between two approaches developed independently to deal with this difficulty. The first approach infers the value of parameters from assignment examples provided by the DMs, as an elicitation aid. Each assignment example originates mathematical constraints that the parameter values should satisfy. The second approach considers a set of constraints on the parameter values reflecting the imprecise information that the DMs are able to provide. Then, it computes the best and worst categories for each alternative compatible with constraints, in order to present robust conclusions. Both approaches avoid asking for precise values for the parameters. Rather, they proceed to solve the problem in a way that requires from the DMs much less effort. By integrating these two approaches, this paper proposes a new interactive approach, where the insight obtained during robustness analyses guides the DMs during the elicitation phase.