# Analysis of the Relationships between Factors Contributing to Marine casualties
## 4 Results
This includes verifying whether the action is equally strong in all criteria and in the final assessment, as well as whether there are subgroups of actions. This will help to find the causes that are strongest for a given problem or dominate only in certain areas of the problem. The final ranking is determined by the order in which the actions are distributed along the resultant vector (Figure 5a). This can be obtained by an orthogonal projection of the action on an extended axis of the preference vector. The ranking begins on the side where the end of the vector is located. The order is as follows: A1-A3-A6-A7-A5-A2-A4. Action A1 is located near the end of the resultant vector and the criteria axes C1 and C2. It is the strongest action and has the greatest impact on the multi-criteria assessment. Action A3 is located near the end of the C4 criterion axis. Action A6 is located in the centre. These two actions have a medium impact on the multi-criteria evaluation. The weakest factors are A7, A5, A4, and A2. Action A5 is located near the end of the C3 criterion axis. The remaining factors form a subgroup, located in the south-west quadrant. Moreover, the actions A1, A3, A6, and A5 are distributed far apart from each other and in different quadrants. This indicates that they do not have congruence in the individual criteria. Their strength varied in the single criteria assessments. The Criteria C1 and C2 are dominant. They are located close to each other and run similarly to the resultant vector. An examination of the positions of all actions in relation to each axis of the criterion is called a single analysis. The result of this analysis for criterion C1 and C2 is similar. The other two criteria go in opposite directions, which implies different preferences. Figure 5b shows the single analysis of criterion C1. By projecting the actions onto the extended axis, we obtain the order of the actions in this criterion. The closer to the eastern side, the greater the importance of the action. The actions A1, A3, and A6 are the strongest in this criterion. Action A1 also has a large distance from the next actions. This confirms its strength in the criterion. The other actions are at the end of the axis. As the axis of criterion C2 runs almost identically, the outcomes are similar to C1. Figure 6a shows the single analysis of criterion C3. The most significant action here is action A5. It is located closest to the end of the criterion axis. It is followed by the actions A6 and A1. There is a large distance between action A5 and the subsequent actions. However, action A5 is considered weak in the overall assessment. Figure 6b shows the analysis of criterion C4. The actions A1 and A3 are located at the beginning of the axis. The next significant action is A6 (lies on the axis). Further away are the actions A7, A2, and A4. Action A5 has the lowest impact in this criterion. The use of the PCA method in GAIA is related to the quality of the data presented. The quality can be reduced depending on the mapping of the graph. In this case, the quality is high enough that to rely on the results. However, a deviation from the Promethee ranking was noted. The positions of the last two actions (A2 and A4) are swapped. Their final values are almost identical, so discrepancies are possible in this case. This hardly affects the final assessment. Both actions can be treated as a subgroup.