English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In multi-criteria decision making, any Group Decision Support System (GDSS) requires a “social judgment model” for calculation of weights on decision alternatives, and tabulation of individual votes toward a consensus. One could assess a Social Welfare Function - such as Keeney’s - to aggregate individual cardinal preferences or utilities into a group preference. Alternatively, one could use Social Choice Functions - such as Condorcet, Borda, Copeland, and Eigenvector - to aggregate individual ordinal preferences or rankings into a group ranking. This study empirically investigates the consensus between individual preferences and the group preference derived from various aggregation methods.

Using Social Choice Function Vs. Social Welfare Function To Aggregate Individual Preferences In Group Decision Support Systems