IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v261y2017i2p704-714.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets

Author

Listed:
  • Azam, Nouman
  • Zhang, Yan
  • Yao, JingTao

Abstract

Three-way decisions have been used over the years in many application areas. The rough sets and its extensions provide useful approaches for three-way decisions. Typically, these approaches employ a single evaluation function or criterion to induce three-way decisions. When extending the rough set based three-way decisions to multiple criteria decision making (MCDM), two issues are encountered. The first issue is related to the construction and definition of aggregation mechanisms for dealing with differences in results of evaluation functions. The second issue is related to the setting of choice structure for selecting the three types of decision choices. In this article, we consider the role and use of game-theoretic rough set (GTRS) model to resolve and address these two issues. The issue related to differences in evaluation functions is addressed with GTRS by implementing a game that considers multiple evaluation functions as game players. The game-theoretic analysis in the GTRS is employed to resolve the differences by determining a tradeoff between evaluation functions. The issue related to choice structure is addressed by considering the conditions under which different game outcomes could constitute a game solution. In particular, the equilibrium analysis within games is used to construct the rules for three-way decisions. A demonstrative example is used to explain the use of the proposed approach. The relationship between the proposed approach and the probabilistic rough sets is also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Azam, Nouman & Zhang, Yan & Yao, JingTao, 2017. "Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 704-714.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:261:y:2017:i:2:p:704-714
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.12.048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221717300036
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.12.048?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Korhonen, Pekka & Soleimani-damaneh, Majid & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2016. "Dual cone approach to convex-cone dominance in multiple criteria decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1139-1143.
    2. Pawlak, Zdzislaw, 2002. "Rough sets, decision algorithms and Bayes' theorem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 181-189, January.
    3. Li, Renpu & Wang, Zheng-ou, 2004. "Mining classification rules using rough sets and neural networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 157(2), pages 439-448, September.
    4. Blaszczynski, Jerzy & Greco, Salvatore & Slowinski, Roman, 2007. "Multi-criteria classification - A new scheme for application of dominance-based decision rules," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 181(3), pages 1030-1044, September.
    5. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    6. Pawlak, Zdzisaw & Sowinski, Roman, 1994. "Rough set approach to multi-attribute decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 443-459, February.
    7. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 2001. "Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 1-47, February.
    8. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 1999. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by dominance relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 63-83, August.
    9. Tülin Erdem & Michael P. Keane, 1996. "Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Capturing Dynamic Brand Choice Processes in Turbulent Consumer Goods Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20.
    10. Edi Karni, 2009. "A theory of medical decision making under uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 1-16, August.
    11. Chakhar, Salem & Ishizaka, Alessio & Labib, Ashraf & Saad, Inès, 2016. "Dominance-based rough set approach for group decisions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 206-224.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chao, Xiangrui & Kou, Gang & Peng, Yi & Viedma, Enrique Herrera, 2021. "Large-scale group decision-making with non-cooperative behaviors and heterogeneous preferences: An application in financial inclusion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 288(1), pages 271-293.
    2. Huang, Bing & Li, Huaxiong & Feng, Guofu & Zhou, Xianzhong, 2019. "Dominance-based rough sets in multi-scale intuitionistic fuzzy decision tables," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 348(C), pages 487-512.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hu, Qiwei & Chakhar, Salem & Siraj, Sajid & Labib, Ashraf, 2017. "Spare parts classification in industrial manufacturing using the dominance-based rough set approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1136-1163.
    2. Abbas Mardani & Mehrbakhsh Nilashi & Jurgita Antucheviciene & Madjid Tavana & Romualdas Bausys & Othman Ibrahim, 2017. "Recent Fuzzy Generalisations of Rough Sets Theory: A Systematic Review and Methodological Critique of the Literature," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-33, October.
    3. Sarah Ben Amor & Fateh Belaid & Ramzi Benkraiem & Boumediene Ramdani & Khaled Guesmi, 2023. "Multi-criteria classification, sorting, and clustering: a bibliometric review and research agenda," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 771-793, June.
    4. Du, Wen Sheng & Hu, Bao Qing, 2017. "Dominance-based rough fuzzy set approach and its application to rule induction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 690-703.
    5. Du, Wen Sheng & Hu, Bao Qing, 2018. "A fast heuristic attribute reduction approach to ordered decision systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 440-452.
    6. Bouzayane, Sarra & Saad, Inès, 2020. "A multicriteria approach based on rough set theory for the incremental Periodic prediction," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 282-298.
    7. Chen, Li-Fei & Tsai, Chih-Tsung, 2016. "Data mining framework based on rough set theory to improve location selection decisions: A case study of a restaurant chain," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 197-206.
    8. Lejeune, Miguel & Lozin, Vadim & Lozina, Irina & Ragab, Ahmed & Yacout, Soumaya, 2019. "Recent advances in the theory and practice of Logical Analysis of Data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 1-15.
    9. Chakhar, Salem & Ishizaka, Alessio & Thorpe, Andy & Cox, Joe & Nguyen, Thang & Ford, Liz, 2020. "Calculating the relative importance of condition attributes based on the characteristics of decision rules and attribute reducts: Application to crowdfunding," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(2), pages 689-712.
    10. Julio Cezar Soares Silva & Diogo Ferreira de Lima Silva & Luciano Ferreira & Adiel Teixeira de Almeida-Filho, 2022. "A dominance-based rough set approach applied to evaluate the credit risk of sovereign bonds," 4OR, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 139-164, March.
    11. Doumpos, Michael & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2011. "Preference disaggregation and statistical learning for multicriteria decision support: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(3), pages 203-214, March.
    12. Renaud, J. & Thibault, J. & Lanouette, R. & Kiss, L.N. & Zaras, K. & Fonteix, C., 2007. "Comparison of two multicriteria decision aid methods: Net Flow and Rough Set Methods in a high yield pulping process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1418-1432, March.
    13. Wang, Hailiang & Zhou, Mingtian & She, Kun, 2015. "Induction of ordinal classification rules from decision tables with unknown monotonicity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 172-181.
    14. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    15. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2010. "Handling multicriteria preferences in cluster analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 819-827, May.
    16. Pawel Lezanski & Maria Pilacinska, 2018. "The dominance-based rough set approach to cylindrical plunge grinding process diagnosis," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 989-1004, June.
    17. Salvatore Barbagallo & Simona Consoli & Nello Pappalardo & Salvatore Greco & Santo Zimbone, 2006. "Discovering Reservoir Operating Rules by a Rough Set Approach," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 20(1), pages 19-36, February.
    18. Oppio, Alessandra & Dell’Ovo, Marta & Torrieri, Francesca & Miebs, Grzegorz & Kadziński, Miłosz, 2020. "Understanding the drivers of Urban Development Agreements with the rough set approach and robust decision rules," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    19. Zopounidis, Constantin & Doumpos, Michael, 2002. "Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 229-246, April.
    20. Tlili, Ali & Belahcène, Khaled & Khaled, Oumaima & Mousseau, Vincent & Ouerdane, Wassila, 2022. "Learning non-compensatory sorting models using efficient SAT/MaxSAT formulations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 979-1006.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:261:y:2017:i:2:p:704-714. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.