Solve the homography in the Arabic words unvowelized
by multi-criteria analysis
Rekkal kahina ABBAS Moncef
Institute of Computer Science, USTHB, Faculty of Mathematics
University of Bechar, Bechar; LAID3 Laboratory Dépt.RO,
Algeria, Algéria,
Telephone number moncef_abbas@yahoo.com
0668953970,
Bechar 08000
rekkal@yahoo.fr
ABSTRACT
NLP is still faced with a recurrent problem is the ambiguity that
occurs on almost all treatment levels: morphological, syntactic
and semantic, generating several likely solutions. The Arabic
lexicon contains homographs words, without bending, can have
different pronunciation, different meanings and different
grammatical categories usually is at this point that our
contribution will appear in that work on a new class of tagger
whose disambiguation module is able to solve this homography
by selecting a suitable solution from a set of likely scenarios based
on the approach and techniques from multi-criteria analysis
(MCA). The method used in this article is the method
PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for
Enrichment Evaluations).
Keywords: PROMETHEE, Multi-criteria analysis, Ambiguity
Morphsyntactic, Disambiguation.
I. INTRODUCTION
The language processing is interested in computer processing
involving the linguistic material: spelling and grammar, text
analysis, text generation and machine translation etc.
Since the early work in Natural Language Processing (NLP), we
pursued various research directions. One can distinguish
particular numerical approaches based on probability and
statistics and syntactic approaches to formal language theory. We
also note that the range of research ranges from the detailed
analysis of sentences to more comprehensive approaches a text as
a whole.
Any application of NLP requires morphological analysis step to
identify for each word its class and its different morphosyntactic
features.
If some computer systems for NLP currently seem satisfactory for
some Latin languages, representation, capture, editing and
processing non-Latin languages such as Arabic remain largely
unexplored. In addition, most of the models developed for the
formalization of subsets of natural language, in morphosyntactic,
are not configurable; often dedicated to Indo-European languages,
they are difficult to adapt to other language families such as the
Semitic languages.
The work we present in this paper is in this context, specifically in
the context of the morphosyntactic analysis for non Arabic
vowelized. Our contribution, in the field of automatic processing
of natural language, is to design and implement a morphosyntactic
1
HOCEINI Youcef
Institute of Computer Science,
University of Bechar, Bechar;
Algeria,
Telephone number
0775250017,
Bechar 08000
y_hoceini@yahoo.fr
analyzer for Arabic vowelized not treating the various cases of
Arab ambiguities.
Our désambigüiseur is based on a multicriteria approach to
decision allowing the classification of disambiguation scenarios
with a view to bring out the best. This approach has the advantage
of reducing the dominated scenarios and classify the rest
according to different evaluation criteria.
II.MORPHOLOGICAL AMBIGUITIES
Like all Semitic languages, Arabic is characterized by a complex
morphology and a rich vocabulary which involves automatic
analysis difficulty. In what follows, we present some ambiguities
resulting from the automatic processing of Arabic at the
morphological level.
A. Ambiguities derivational
Most Arabic words are derived from triliteral or quadriliteral
roots. The Arabic word is not the result of a simple concatenation
of morphemes as is the case for the English (eg unfailingly = a +
fail + ing + ly) (Beesley, 1996), but it is from a root, a
combination of vowels, prefixes, infixes, suffixes and a
morphological scheme that obtains a word.
Example: The word "‫( "يتأثسون‬they influence) is the combination
of the root "‫( "أثس‬he influenced) the prefix "‫ "يت‬the infix "" and the
suffix "‫"ون‬.
B. Ambiguities agglutination
Unlike Latin languages, Arabic, articles, prepositions, pronouns,
etc. stick to adjectives, nouns, verbs and particles to which they
relate. Compared to the French, an Arabic word can sometimes
match a French phrase (Souissi, 1997).
Example: The Arabic word "‫ "أتتركسووىا‬corresponds in French to
the phrase « Est-ce que vous vous souvenez de nou ? » "Do you
remember us?"
This feature generates a morphological ambiguity during the
analysis. Indeed, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between a
proclitic or enclitic and an original character of the word. For
example, "‫ "و‬character in the word "‫( "وصل‬it happened) is an
original character while in the word "‫( "وفتخ‬opened), it is a
proclitique.
C. Ambiguities due to annexation
In Arabic as in any other language such as French, there are
compound words which when combined do not give the same
sense that when you take every single word. In French, for
example, we find the compound word "pomme de terre". In
Arabic, compound words are very limited, examples ‫( بيه بيه‬entre
les deux), ‫( قوس قزح‬sky arc), ‫عباد الشمش‬, etc.
Example: For the phrase "‫( "زأيت بىات الجاز‬I saw the neighbor
girls). The word "‫( "بىات‬Girls) is not determined feminine plural
noun while the word "‫( "الجاز‬neighbor) is a masculine singular
definite name. The analysis in this case gives different
morphological characteristics for these two words that can not
have a role in the sentence if they are combined into a single
morphological unit (a group of words). The morphological
characteristics of the group "‫ "بىات الجاز‬will be those of his first
word "‫"بىات‬.
D. Ambiguities due to non voyellation
To describe the problem of voyellation, we take the definition of
Joseph Dichy:
"The current Arabic script does not rate the short vowels,
consonant gemination, the contingencies marks composed of a
short vowel followed for the names and adjectives indeterminate,
a consonant" ‫(" ن‬n - tanwin) etc. Writing is called 'non-
vowelized'. These signs of voyellation, which are made when they
are recorded, as diacritics placed above or below the letters appear
in certain religious texts (Qur'an or hadith) and literature (classical
poetry in particular): we say that they are published in vowelized
spelling.
A distinction is also two practical, that of completely writing
vowelized and one that is partially. Voyellation partial answers, in
his careful editions, the lifting of certain ambiguities first reading.
Codification leaning on a tradition: it does not present systematic.
"[Dichy, 1997].
The automatic analysis of Arabic faces the formidable problem of
the lack of vowels (or diacritics) in the texts. This issue causes
many cases of lexical ambiguity Arabic given the polysemous
nature of unvowelized words. The problem of multiple
voyellation, although much more common in Arabic, can be
compared to that posed multiple accentuation of unaccented
French words.
To illustrate this, we consider a non-accented word in French, as
fishing. This word can be interpreted as fishing (female name), sin
(male name and past participle of the verb to fish) and fishing
(Word, Present indicative, Active Voice, 3rd person masculine
singular feminine). Similarly for Arabic, the word no vowelized
"‫ "فصل‬taken out of context without voyellation can be:
- A past tense verb conjugated in the third person singular "‫"فصل‬
(it dismissed);
- A masculine noun "‫( "فصل‬chapter, season);
- Letter of coordination "‫( "ف‬then) + the "‫ "صل‬verb (li) the
imperative combined with the second person masculine singular.
In addition, many Arabic words are homographic: they have the
same orthographic form, although the pronunciation is different.
This homography, when bounded by other phenomena (no
voyellation, inflected and agglutinative morphology, etc.) follows
2
a fairly high rate of ambiguity. Indeed, among the many factors
contributing to this problem we mention that:
• The Arabic lexicon contains homographs words, without
bending, may have different pronunciations, different meanings
and different grammatical categories generally. ‫( ذهب‬dhb)
 ‫( ذهب‬Dahab - gold)
 ‫( ذهب‬Dahaba - he went)
•During flexion of verbs, succession morphological and
orthographic operations (such as deleting characters or
assimilation) frequently produce inflected forms homographs that
may belong to two or more lemmas. The following example
shows a simple verbal form can be interpreted as belonging to five
lemmas. ‫(يعد‬y‛d)
 ‫()أعاد( يُ ِعد‬yu‛id, áa‛āda – he remade)
 ‫( )عاد( يَعُد‬ya‛ud, ‛āda – he returns)
 ‫( )وعد( يَ ِعد‬ya‛id, wa‛ada – it promises)
 ‫( )عد( يَ ُع ّد‬ya‛udd, ‛adda – it account)
 ‫( )أعد( يُ ِع ّد‬yu‛idd, áa‛adda – it prepares)
Some lemmas are different only by repetition, through the letter
Sadda without this being explicitly written. The two forms below,
differ only in the repetition of the syllable in the middle.
‫( دزس‬drs)
 ‫س‬
َ ‫( َد َز‬darasa – he studied)
 ‫َّس‬
َ ‫( َدز‬darrasa – he taught).
• The bending of a verb can produce a homographic form having a
nominal lemma..
‫أصد‬ (ásd)
 ‫( أ ُص ّد‬áasuddu - I block)
 ‫( أصد‬áasad - a lion)
• The proclitics can accidentally generate two homographic forms.
‫‛( علمي‬lmy)
 ‫‛( علمي‬ilmiyy - Scientific) ‫علمي‬
 (‫ علم‬+ ‫‛( )ي‬ilm + y - my knowledge).
The example, below, shows the ambiguity caused by the
conjugation of the same verb accomplished active voice and
passive voice and imperative.
‫أزصل‬ (ársl)
 ‫( أز َصل‬áarsala – sent)
 ‫( أُز ِصل‬áursila – is sent)
 ‫( أَز ِصل‬áarsil - sends [impératif])
�The following two forms are homographic while the first is
conjugated in the 3rd person of the female and the second is
flexed at the 2nd person masculine.
‫( تكتب‬tktb)
 ُ‫( تَ ْكتُب‬taktubu - she writes)
 ُ‫( تَ ْكتُب‬taktubu - you write masculin])
�Similarly, the dual form is always confused with the regular
plural form in the accusative and genitive.
 .‫( أمسيكييه‬ámrykyyn)
 ‫( أمسيكيَّ ْي ِه‬áamriykiyyayni – American [duel])
 َ‫( أمسيكيِّيه‬áamriykiyyiyna – American [plural])
III. Module disambiguation
Disambiguation is a crucial step in the process of labeling
morphosyntactic at this level of treatment if a word is mislabeled;
rules of grammar apply poorly or not at all. However
disambiguation phase is not always necessary or required for the
proper conduct of the labeling process. It must be said that the
disambiguation module comes into play in one case, one in which
the token (word) receives more than one label (more than
morphosyntactic information) which will generate a situation of
confusion or ambiguity.
FIGURE 1. CONDITION OF USE OF DISAMBIGUATION MODULE.
A.THE APPROACHES DISAMBIGUATION
Most taggers that exist today are classified according to their
mode of disambiguation. Thus in the literature, approaches to
disambiguation fall into two (02) categories and each category
includes one or more techniques to lift the morphological
ambiguity. The figure below gives an indication of the different
approaches and techniques that go with it:
Figure 2. Representation of different approaches and techniques
disambiguation.
B. An approach to disambiguation based on
multi-criteria analysis
The main objective of this study is to propose a new approach to
disambiguation plays the same role as the two (02) previous
approaches but based on other techniques. For this, we chose a
method based on mathematical principles, namely the multi-
criteria analysis.
3
C. Why multi-criteria analysis?
NLP often induces decision-making practices that correspond to a
classification and a sequence of choices here using the tools and
techniques of multi-criteria analysis prove promising and effective
In most of the decision making process, they may be as complex
and conflicting, it is often possible to update a number of common
axes to different actors, by which they justify changing their
preferences. The choice to use different criteria of meaning
around these axes is trying to model what might appear to be the
stable part of the perception of the problem the various actors
involved.
Multi-criteria models are based on various assumptions which we
retain the following [09] [10].
- The fact that the criteria are multiple involves the search for a
compromise, an acceptable solution, as opposed to an optimal
solution rigidly defined.
- The fact that the selected algorithms are flexible enough to allow
many iterations and inexpensive also solves the non-simultaneity
of information.
For our problem morphological ambiguity labeller can be in a
situation similar to that of the decision maker. By the fact that it
(the labeler) can have multiple labels for a single recognized
lexical unit, where he must choose one from this set....
Thus in both (02) If that is the decision maker or labeller face a
problem of decision making, which aims to choose the right
alternative (an action or label) from a set (stocks, labels ), which
we call thereafter, a set of actions or potential labels, and that
based on two (02) parameters, namely: the criteria and the method
of resolution to match.
It is this combination in the definition of these two (02) problems
(the decision maker, morphological ambiguity) that left us opt for
this mathematical approach namely the multi-criteria analysis.
D. Incorporation of a problem by MCA
Let X = {x1, .., xn} all scenarios disambiguation. These scenarios
are different, finite in number, and constitute the entirety of the
solutions (labels) possible.
To choose the best scenario X, using a set F = {f1, .., fq} which is
a Coherent family of criteria. In order to judge each
disambiguation scenarios in each of the criteria, we define an
evaluation function as follows:
fj : X R, j=1,…, q
x fj(x) où fj(x) represents the evaluation of the x scenario fj
criterion.
Each of these functions should be maximized (or minimized) by
the standard of the type used.
Ideal Scenario: A scenario is ideal if it says is the best solution
for all criteria.
Dominance relation between scenarios: we say that x1 x2
scenario dominates a scenario if and only if fj (x1) ≤ fj (x2) for
each j and with at least one of the inequalities is strict.
Effective scenario: A scenario x in X is said to be efficient if and
only if no other scenario X dominates. All effective scenarios is
considered all the more interesting solutions.
Ranking of scenarios: The objective is to determine the overall parameters for each curve represent the thresholds of indifference
scenario that enjoys the best ratings. Thus, we calculate for each and / or preference.
scenario xi, an overall evaluation score S(xi) represents the
weighted sum of different xi assessments to all criteria.

E. criteria analysis approach: Main Steps

The steps of the proposed method are:
- Step 1: The establishment of a set that contains all the actions or
solutions (in our case it is ambiguous labels) possible:
Or "E" that set / E = {e1, e2, ..., en}, where e1: is considered a
candidate tag that systematically generates a morphosyntactic
information;
- Step 2: Building a coherent criteria: F = {f1, f2, ..., fp};
- Step 3: Define an evaluation function: generating an evaluation
function for each criterion. The result is an evaluation table called
evaluation matrix.
- Step 4: Weighting and aggregation criteria:
a) Weighting: is to determine the weight of each criterion
according to its importance, the criteria weighting method will
allow discrimination between the criteria for designating a weight
for each criterion, which will generate a weighting vector.
b) Aggregation: There are three (03) major categories of methods
using multi-criteria decision methods these categories are
represented in the following figure:

-Various Types of criterion [Vincke 1989]

PROMETHEE Methods I and II are as
follows:
• Step 1: We fix for each criterion, one of six forms of curves
proposed.
In PROMETHEE and the parameters associated with it such as
weight, meaning assessment for each criterion (Max / Min), the
thresholds of preference and indifference thresholds.
• Step 2: For each pair of actions (ai, ak); the overall preference is
calculated (degree of upgrade) as follows:

Figure 3. The categories of multi-criteria decision support

methods.
• Step 3: Calculate the flows into and out of each action ai.
The aggregation of this case is made by Advanced partial
Positive flows that have
aggregation methods (PROMETHEE).
expressed strong inflow
- Step 5: Determine the total pre orders and carry out the actions
of storage. Negative flow that
expresses the weakness of've outflow

F. The methods of synthesis upgrade approach

(promethee) [Brans and Vincke, 1985]:
foundation
PROMETHEE methods are based on an extension of the test
concept for the introduction of a function expressing the
preference of decision maker to have an action in relation to
another action ak. For each criterion, the decision maker is asked
to choose one of six forms of curves shown below. The
• Step 4: Identify 2 total pre-orders and carry out the actions of
storage
- The first total pre-order of assigning the shares in descending
order of Φ +.
-The Second total pre-order of assigning the shares in ascending
order of Φ-.
Intersection Of 2 total pre-orders gives the partial pre-order the
ROMETHEE method I.

4
-PROMETHEE II of assigning the shares in descending order of To Apply the PROMETHEE method, we must be able to calculate
scores Φ (ai) defined as follows: degrees of preference, we need to know other parameters: the
Φ (ai) = Φ+ (ai) – Φ- (ai) preference function type associated with each criterion and any
thresholds that are attached to it (preferably, indifference,
Thus, PROMETHEE II provides a total pre-order. Gaussian and also the sense of evaluation).
All this information is summarized in the table below:
IV. Solution Overview and Application Table II. Type of preference functions and associated
thresholds
Our solution follows the following steps:
• Step 1: Construction of the list of labels. This list is built criterion Fréquency Vowel structure
directly after an ambiguous morphological analysis (multiple matching
solutions) which will generate the set E. Thus, for the sentence:
Function Type Pseudo Critère2 Pré- Pseudo
"‫"لقد عمس ابه عمس طويال‬
(form5 critère Critère 2
After recognition (morphosyntactic analysis), generating patterns
vincke ,89)
that word can be different, ie are we a case of ambiguous word
"‫ "عمس‬that can be a verb (Vtype َََ‫ ُع ِّمس‬, nameType1 ‫ ُع َم َس‬, Threshold of 1 // 0
nameType2 ‫ ُع َم ُس‬, nameType3 ‫) ُع ْمس‬, in this case the set E is: E= indifference (q)
{Vtype, nameType 1, nameType 2, nameType 3}. Threshold 20 10 1
• Step 2: In order to get coherent criteria F, we propose three preferably (p)
basic criteria for discriminating between the labeling scenarios: Max Max Max
Evaluation
The vowel pattern match inside the word frequency criterion, sense
structure criterion.

Tableau III. Evaluation Matrix

- Vowel matching criteria: This test will use the position of
vowels to disambiguate it is a criterion to be maximized. The criterion Fréquency Vowel Structure
evaluation function that goes with it is the addition (+), so that a matching
proper position of a vowel is worth one (1) after application of the stock
test we have (‫( ) ُع ِّم َس‬1+1+1=3), nameType1 (‫( ) ٌع َم َس‬1+0+1=2), ‫( فُ َع ََل‬S1) 64 2 0
nameType2 (‫( ) ٌع َم ُس‬1+0+0=1), nameType3 (‫( ) ُع ْمس‬1+0+0=1).
َ‫( فُ َع ُل‬S2) 3 1 0
- Frequency criterion: - Frequency Criterion: This criterion
‫( فُ ِّع ََل‬S3) 1 3 1
favors the scenario whose characteristics have the greatest
frequency. The score of this test scenario x represents his َ‫( فُعَل‬S4) 1 1 0
appearance rate calculated on the basis of statistical analysis used
in the body so it is a criterion to be maximized. We distinguish
four possible case to which specific scores are assigned: Vtype
(‫( ) ُع ِّم َس‬1), nameType1 (‫( ) ٌع َم َس‬64), nameType2 (‫( ) ٌع َم ُس‬3),
nameType3 (‫( ) ُع ْمس‬0). · Calcul de Pj (a, b) et d=g(a)-g(b)
-Criterion Structure: the word ((‫ عمس‬it can be a proper name The calculated are summarized in the table below:
(Omar) or a verb Accomplished (He lived a long year) or a name Tableau IV. The differences between actions
(age).
Fréquency Vowel matching Structure
In this case we must use the rules of grammar of the Arabic
language to know morphosyntactic category of the word. It is
S1 S2 S3 S4 S1 S2 S3 S4 S1 S2 S3 S4
assumed that the word ((‫ عمس‬own name (‫ )لَقَ ْد ٌع َم َس ابه ُع َم َس طويال‬or ( ‫لقد‬
‫ ) ُع ْمسْ ابه عمس طويال‬in this case the sentence is false and has no sense
then that word is preceded by the word (‫ أداة تحقيق‬:‫ )لقد‬so it should S1 0 1 1 1 0 0.1 0 0.1 0 0 0 0
be a verb ‫ ُع ِّم َس‬this conclusion we will impose a zero score for the
proper name tag (0) to the word "‫ " ٌع َم َس‬and "‫ " ٌع َم ُس‬and score (1) for S2 0 0 0.05 0.05 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
the verb to the word labe ‫ ع ِّمس‬. S3 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0 0.2 1 1 0 1
- The weight of the various criteria are shown in the following S4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
table:
Tableau I.Weight associated with the three criteria
• Step 3: degree preferably p Calculate
criterion Vowel matching Frequency Criterion
criteria criterion Structure · Calcul de degré de préférence
p (a1, a2) = ((0.10 * 0) + (0.70 * 0) + (0.20 * 0) = 0, we doing the
weight 0,70 0,10 0.20
same for the other pairs, it may infer the values of p (a, b) which
are given in Table below:

5
 Tableau V.The degree of preference VI .Conclusion
π S1 S2 S3 S4 As main conclusion, it can be deduced from this work is that the
S1 0 0.17 0.10 0.17 multi-criteria approach can be considered as an alternative
classification or choice to be combined with one of the two (02)
S2 0 0 0.005 0.005
existing approaches (or stochastic constraints) to address the
S3 0.27 0.34 0 0.34 problem of morphological ambiguity and is a key crossing point
S4 0 0 0 0 to the success or failure of an application in automatic processing
of Arabic.
We proposed in this paper a method for analyzing and
.Calcul Of inflow, outflow, net flow for each action ai morphosyntactic disambiguation of Arabic texts unvowelized.
Tableau VI. inflow, outflow, net flow This method is part of the approach using multiple criteria
decision, the analyzer allows comprehensive morphosyntactic
p Φ +(ai) Φ -(ai) Φ(ai) analysis. It is based on segmentation, this step represents a
S1 0.15 0.09 0.06 fundamental step to recover the words associated with each word
and a morphosyntactic category so if the cardinality of the latter is
S2 0.003 0.17 -0.17
greater than 1 so we have a case of ambiguity we can remedy the a
S3 0.32 0.04 0.28 partial aggregation algorithm such as Prométhée.
S4 0 0.172 -0.172 The analyzer provides all possible morphosyntactic categories of
the word and the output of a disambiguation module we obtain a
classification and selected the most suitable scenario.
• The inflow expressing the character of outperforming the
response to the (n-1) other actions, that is to say its power. References
0≤ Φ + (ai) ≤1 [1] Abdelkader HAMMAMI., Modélisation Techno-économique
d'une chaine logistique dans une entreprise réseau, 2003.
• The outflow outperforming express the character of the response [2] Beesley K., "Arabic Finite-State Morphological Analysis and
to the (n-1) other actions, that is to say, his weakness. Generation, 1996.
0≤ Φ - (ai) ≤1 [3] Brans J.P, Vincke Ph. A Preference Ranking Organization
Method, 1985.
• The net flux express the balance of inflow and out of the action. [4] CHERAGUI Mohamed Amine. Un modèle d’analyse
greater is the better action. multicritère de la levée de l’ambiguïté associé à un Tagger
• Φ (ai) = Φ + (ai) - Φ - (ai) with -1≤ Φ (ai) ≤1 pour le Traitement Automatique de l’arabe, 2010.
[5] J. Dichy, Pour une lexicomatique de l'arabe: l'unité lexicale
- Determine meadows total orders and proceed with the simple de l'inventaire du mot. META - journal de traduction,
actions of storage: Vol. 42, n° 2, pp. 291-306, (1997).
• The incoming flow gives: S3> S1> S2> S4 -> S3 is the most [6] HOCEINI Youssef & ABBAS Moncef., Méthodologie
Multicritère de Désambiguïsation Morphosyntaxique de la
powerful. Langue Arabe ,2009.
• The outflow gives: S3> S1> S2> S4 -> S3 is the least weak. [7] Nouha Chaaben & Lamia Hadrich Belguith., Analyse et
désambiguïsation morphologiques de textes arabes non
Application of PROMETHEE II gives the following total pre voyellés ,2006
order: S3> S1 with eliminating negative values. [8] Roy B., Bouyssou D. Aide multicritère à la décision :
So according to this pre order, the scenario with the highest méthodes et cas: Economica, 1993.
score will be elected, in our case this is the scenario 3 "‫ " َفُ ِّع ََل‬This [9] Roy B. quête de l’optimum et aide à la décision." Cahier du
pattern corresponds to the word ‫ ُع ِّم َس‬. Lamsade n° 167. Université Paris-Dauphine, 21 Pp, 2000.
[10] Roy B. Science de la décision ou science de l’aide à la
décision ?" Revue Internationale de systémique, Vol. 6, pp
497-529, 1992
V. Discussion of results : [11] Slim Mesfar., Analyse morphosyntaxique automatique et
• To evaluate our désambigüiseur, we used a corpus of évaluation. reconnaissance des entités nommes en arabe standard, 2008
it contains of unvowelized words. Our désambigüiseur able to lift [12] Souissi E., "Etiquetage grammatical de l’Arabe voyellé ou
the ambiguity of a word by applying the PROMETHEE method, non", Thèse de doctorat de l’université de Paris III octobre
but it depends on the parameters that we have assigned to 1997.
criterion (weight, the sense of evaluation and also according to the [13] Vincke Ph. L’Aide Multicritère à la Décision. Editions de
l’Université de Bruxelles. Bruxelles 1989.
preference function type associated with each criterion).
• So we plan to work more on the désambiguïseur and that, by
defining more criteria to better generate the right solution (label)
and also working on several larger corpus;
Finally, we would propose PROMETHEE. Its algorithm is easy to
use, it is non-compensatory; and above all, very versatile.
Depending on the case, we can replace it with one of ELECTRE
methods (Elimination and Choice Translating Reality) also very
efficient.