TOPSIS, a popular method for ranking alternatives is based on aggregated distances to ideal and anti-ideal points. As such, it was considered to be essentially different from widely popular and acknowledged `utility-based methods', which build rankings from weight-averaged utility values. Nonetheless, TOPSIS has recently been shown to be a natural generalization of these `utility-based methods' on the grounds that the distances it uses can be decomposed into so called weight-scaled means (WM) and weight-scaled standard deviations (WSD) of utilities. However, the influence that these two components exert on the final ranking cannot be in any way influenced in the standard TOPSIS. This is why, building on our previous results, in this paper we put forward modifications that make TOPSIS aggregations responsive to WM and WSD, achieving some amount of well interpretable control over how the rankings are influenced by WM and WSD. The modifications constitute a natural generalization of the standard TOPSIS method because, thanks to them, the generalized TOPSIS may turn into the original TOPSIS or, otherwise, following the decision maker's preferences, may trade off WM for WSD or WSD for WM. In the latter case, TOPSIS gradually reduces to a regular `utility-based method'. All in all, we believe that the proposed generalizations constitute an interesting practical tool for influencing the ranking by controlled application of a new form of decision maker's preferences.

We introduce the Multi-Robot Connected Fermat Spiral (MCFS), a novel algorithmic framework for Multi-Robot Coverage Path Planning (MCPP) that adapts Connected Fermat Spiral (CFS) from the computer graphics community to multi-robot coordination for the first time. MCFS uniquely enables the orchestration of multiple robots to generate coverage paths that contour around arbitrarily shaped obstacles, a feature that is notably lacking in traditional methods. Our framework not only enhances area coverage and optimizes task performance, particularly in terms of makespan, for workspaces rich in irregular obstacles but also addresses the challenges of path continuity and curvature critical for non-holonomic robots by generating smooth paths without decomposing the workspace. MCFS solves MCPP by constructing a graph of isolines and transforming MCPP into a combinatorial optimization problem, aiming to minimize the makespan while covering all vertices. Our contributions include developing a unified CFS version for scalable and adaptable MCPP, extending it to MCPP with novel optimization techniques for cost reduction and path continuity and smoothness, and demonstrating through extensive experiments that MCFS outperforms existing MCPP methods in makespan, path curvature, coverage ratio, and overlapping ratio. Our research marks a significant step in MCPP, showcasing the fusion of computer graphics and automated planning principles to advance the capabilities of multi-robot systems in complex environments. Our code is available at https://github.com/reso1/MCFS.

Proper scoring rules incentivize experts to accurately report beliefs, assuming predictions cannot influence outcomes. We relax this assumption and investigate incentives when predictions are performative, i.e., when they can influence the outcome of the prediction, such as when making public predictions about the stock market. We say a prediction is a fixed point if it accurately reflects the expert's beliefs after that prediction has been made. We show that in this setting, reports maximizing expected score generally do not reflect an expert's beliefs, and we give bounds on the inaccuracy of such reports. We show that, for binary predictions, if the influence of the expert's prediction on outcomes is bounded, it is possible to define scoring rules under which optimal reports are arbitrarily close to fixed points. However, this is impossible for predictions over more than two outcomes. We also perform numerical simulations in a toy setting, showing that our bounds are tight in some situations and that prediction error is often substantial (greater than 5-10%). Lastly, we discuss alternative notions of optimality, including performative stability, and show that they incentivize reporting fixed points.