RATIONALE FOR ESTABLISHING STRICT ORDER RELATIONS IN THE PROBLEM OF RANKING / SELECTING ALTERNATIVES OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL

The concept of ranking and choice are closely related. The selection process is the final phase of the ranking procedure, the result of which is the preferred subset of alternatives. The ranking procedure is the process of establishing a strict order relation between a given number of alternatives. The PURPOSE of work is the experimental confirmation of the hypothesis advancing the idea that the problem of providing a strict order relation for complex ranking/selection problems can be overcome on the basis of mechanization (computerization) of the mental activity of the subject of choice via decomposition of original intuition manifestations on the set of presented alternatives into a set of particular, simpler problems. METHODS. The set purpose is achieved through the use of mathematical and statistical methods. RESULTS AND THEIR DISCUSSION. The procedure for establishing a strict order relations is presented by two aspects in two stages. In the first case, the number of alternatives is increased stage-by-stage under the fixed number of essential characteristics. In the second case, there is a step-by-step increase in the number of essential characteristics under the fixed number of alternatives. The process of establishing a strict order relationship involved the respondents with different choice strategies, who were offered to initiate the alternative ranking procedure first intuitively, and then by constructing a model of preferences in Decon Jobs software product. CONCLUSIONS. The specific examples of establishing the strict order relations between the alternatives obtained intuitively and using the averaged preference model allowed to conclude that the growth in the number of alternatives complicates a person to establish a strict order between them. The software product Decon Jobs allows to reduce the level of uncertainty between individual alternatives and to increase the percentage of establishing a strict order relation.

ranking, choice, strict order, building materials, concrete, alternatives to building materials, characteristics of building materials

1. Бурков В.Н., Искаков М.Б., Коргин Н.А. Применение обобщенных медианных схем для построения неманипулируемых механизмов многокритериальной активной экспертизы // Проблемы управления. 2008. № 4. С. 38-47.

2. Ильин И.В. Поведение потребителей. Санкт-Петербург: Питер, 2000. 224 с.

3. Кривогина Д.Н., Сафонов Н.И., Харитонов В.А., Вычегжанин А.В., Гревцев А.М. Инструментальные средства «соединения креативности и технологичности» в задачах субъектноориентированного управления [Электронный ресурс] // Интернет-журнал «Управление экономическими системами». 2017. URL: http://uecs.ru/instrumentalniimetodyekonomiki.pdf (дата обращения: 13.07.2018).

4. Кривогина Д.Н., Харитонов В.А., Алексеев А.О. Парадигма инженерной поддержки технологий субъектно-ориентированного управления [Электронный ресурс] // Политематический сетевой электронный научный журнал Кубанского государственного аграрного университета. 2015. № 112 (08). URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/paradigma-inzhenernoy-podderzhki-tehnologiy-subektno-orientirovannogo-upravleniya. pdf (дата обращения: 13.07.2018).

5. Мухина М.К. Изучение стиля жизни потребителей и сегментирование рынка на основе психографических типов [Электронный ресурс] // Журнал «Маркетинг в России и за рубежом». 2000. Т. 3. URL: http://www.mavriz.ru/articles/2000/3/262.html (дата обращения: 23.06.2018).

6. Мыльников Л.А. Поддержка принятия решений при управлении инновационными проектами. Пермь: Изд-во Пермского гос. техн. ун-та, 2010. 245 с.

7. Подиновский В.В. Введение в теорию важности критериев в многокритериальных задачах принятия решений. М.: Физматлит, 2007. 64 с.

8. Федосов С.В., Грузинцева Н.А., Лыскова М.А., Гусев Б.Н., Никитина Т.Ю., Никифорова Н.Е. Методика оценки оптимального ассортимента предприятия по производству геотекстильных строительных материалов // Известия высших учебных заведений. Строительство. 2015. С. 49-55.

9. Фейгенбаум А., Гличев А.В. Контроль качества продукции. М.: Экономика, 1986. 471 с.

10. Al-Hammad A.-M., Hassanain M.A., Juaim M.N. Evaluation and selection of curtain wall systems for medium-high rise building construction (2014). Structural Survey, 32 (4). P. 299-314. DOI: 10.1108/SS-10-2013-0035.

11. Kono J., Ostermeyer Y., Wallbaum H. Trade-offbetween the social and environmental performance of green concrete: The case of 6 countries. Sustainability (Switzerland), 2018. 10 (7). 2309. DOI: 10.3390/su10072309.

12. Lauven L.-P., Karschin I., Geldermann J. Simultaneously optimizing the capacity and configuration of biorefineries (2018). Computers and Industrial Engineering. 2018. Vol. 124. Р. 12-23. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2018.07.014.

13. Mos B., Dworjanyn S.A., Mamo L.T., Kelaher B.P. Building global change resilience: Concrete has the potential to ameliorate the negative effects of climate-driven ocean change on a newly-settled calcifying invertebrate (2019). Science of the Total Environment. 2018. Vol. 646. Р. 1349-1358. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.379.

14. Rohden A.B., Garcez M.R. Increasing the sustainability potential of a reinforced concrete building through design strategies: Case study (2018). Case Studies in Construction Materials, 9. P. e00174. DOI: 10.1016/j.cscm.2018.e00174.