UHK-FIM
Ismail AbdelHafez
SPM1- Autumn2013
Comparison of decision-making software
Decision-making software (DMS) is a type of decision support system to help individuals and
organizations with their decision-making processes, typically resulting in ranking, sorting or
choosing from among alternatives.
Decision Making Methods
Most decision-making processes supported by DMS are based on decision analysis, most
commonly multi-criteria decision making (MCDM). MCDM involves evaluating and
combining alternatives' characteristics on two or more criteria or attributes in order to rank,
sort or choose from among the alternatives. DMS employs a variety of MCDM methods:

Aggregated Indices Randomization Method (AIRM)

Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Analytic network process (ANP, an extension of AHP)

Elimination and Choice Expressing Reality (ELECTRE)

Multi-attribute global inference of quality (MAGIQ)

Multi-attribute utility theory (MAUT)

Potentially all pairwise rankings of all possible alternatives (PAPRIKA)

Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation (PROMETHEE)

Simple multi-attribute rating technique (SMART)
1
Naturally, there are significant differences between these methods and, accordingly, the
DMS implementing them. Such differences include:
1. The extent to which the decision problem is broken into a hierarchy of subproblems;
2. Whether or not pairwise comparisons of alternatives and/or criteria are used to
elicit decision-makers' preferences;
3. The use of interval scale or ratio scale measurements of decision-makers'
preferences;
4. The number of criteria included;
5. The number of alternatives evaluated, ranging from a few (finite) to infinite;
6. The extent to which numerical scores are used to value and/or rank alternatives;
7. The extent to which incomplete rankings (relative to complete rankings) of
alternatives are produced.
In addition to helping decision-makers to rank, sort or choose from among alternatives,
DMS products often include a variety of additional features and tools; examples include:

Time analysis and time optimization

Sensitivity analysis and fuzzy logic calculations

Risk aversion measurement

Group evaluation (teamwork)

Graphic or visual presentation tools
2
Summary Of Criteria Comparison
Software
Supported
MCDA
Methods
Pairwise
Comparison
Sensitivity
Analysis
Group
Evaluation
Webbased
1000Minds
PAPRIKA
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Altova
MetaTeam
WSM
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Analytica
Criterium
DecisionPlus
AHP, SMART
Yes
Yes
No
No
DecideIT
MAUT
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Expert Choice AHP
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Hiview3
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Decision Lens AHP, ANP
D-Sight
Logical
Decisions
PROMETHEE,
UTILITY
AHP, MAUT
3
Comparison by Implementation
Implementing Vroom–Yetton Decision Model
1-Decision Supporter
4
5
2- Criterium Decision Plus
6
7
Conclusion
By implementation, it realized that CDP is far better than decision supporter in problems that
require pairwise comparisons and sensitivity analysis.
References:
http://www.wikipedia.org/
8