yogsoth-ai Multi-Method Triangulation
Score the same set of alternatives using 2-3 MCDA methods, compare ranking differences, identify method-sensitive options, and improve decision robustness.
Stages
- Method Selection — Select 2-3 complementary MCDA methods
- Parallel Scoring — Score and rank candidates using each method separately
- Rank Comparison — Compute ranking consistency (Kendall tau, Spearman rho)
- Sensitivity Identification — Identify alternatives whose rankings change significantly across methods
- Method Sensitivity Report — Analyze causes of differences and provide recommendations
Available SOPs
- alternative-scoring — Score alternatives (invoked once per method)
- rank-comparison — Ranking consistency comparison
- method-sensitivity-report — Method sensitivity analysis report
Execution Guidance
- Method selection should cover different paradigms (e.g., compensatory WSM + non-compensatory ELECTRE + compromise VIKOR)
- All methods use the same criteria and weights; only aggregation logic differs
- Kendall tau > 0.8 indicates high inter-method consistency, results are trustworthy
- tau < 0.6 indicates method choice significantly impacts results, requiring deeper analysis
- Pay special attention to alternatives with ranking differences >= 3 positions
- Final recommendations should clarify which conclusions are method-independent (robust) and which depend on method choice
Minimum Yield
Ranking comparison across >=2 methods + difference analysis
Available SOPs
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| SOP | When to use |
|---|---|
| alternative-scoring | Score each candidate alternative against all criteria to produce a score matrix. |
| method-sensitivity-report | Analyze how the choice of MCDA method affects final rankings and identify method-sensitive alternatives. |
| rank-comparison | Compare multiple ranking results to assess agreement and identify divergent items. |