An evidential reasoning based consensus model for multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with interval-valued group consensus requirements
With the aim of modeling multiple attribute group decision analysis problems with group consensus (GC) requirements, a GC based evidential reasoning approach and further an attribute weight based feedback model are sequentially developed based on an evidential reasoning (ER) approach. In real situations, however, giving precise (crisp) assessments for alternatives is often too restrictive and difficult for experts, due to incompleteness or lack of information. Experts may also find it difficult to give appropriate assessments on specific attributes, due to limitation or lack of knowledge, experience and provided data about the problem domain. In this paper, an ER based consensus model (ERCM) is proposed to deal with these situations, in which experts’ assessments are interval-valued rather than precise. Correspondingly, predefined interval-valued GC (IGC) requirements need to be reached after group analysis and discussion within specified times. Also, the process of reaching IGC is accelerated by a feedback mechanism including identification rules at three levels, consisting of the attribute, alternative and global levels, and a suggestion rule. Particularly, recommendations on assessments in the suggestion rule are constructed based on recommendations on their lower and upper bounds detected by the identification rule at a specific level. A preferentially developed industry selection problem is solved by the ERCM to demonstrate its detailed implementation process, validity, and applicability.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- F. J. Cabrerizo & S. Alonso & E. Herrera-Viedma, 2009. "A Consensus Model For Group Decision Making Problems With Unbalanced Fuzzy Linguistic Information," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(01), pages 109-131.
- Kim, Soung Hie & Ahn, Byeong Seok, 1999. "Interactive group decision making procedure under incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 498-507, August.
- Yang, Jian-Bo, 2001. "Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(1), pages 31-61, May.
- J. M. Tapia García & M. J. Del Moral & M. A. Martínez & E. Herrera-Viedma, 2012. "A Consensus Model For Group Decision-Making Problems With Interval Fuzzy Preference Relations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(04), pages 709-725.
- Yang, J.B. & Wang, Y.M. & Xu, D.L. & Chin, K.S., 2006. "The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 309-343, May.
- Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi, 2008. "On consistency measures of linguistic preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(2), pages 430-444, September.
- Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling & Chin, Kwai-Sang, 2006. "The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(1), pages 35-66, November.
- Peter H. Farquhar, 1984. "State of the Art---Utility Assessment Methods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(11), pages 1283-1300, November.
- Guo, Min & Yang, Jian-Bo & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Wang, Hongwei, 2007. "Evidential reasoning based preference programming for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(3), pages 1294-1312, November.
- Kim, Soung Hie & Choi, Sang Hyun & Kim, Jae Kyeong, 1999. "An interactive procedure for multiple attribute group decision making with incomplete information: Range-based approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 139-152, October.
- Fu, Chao & Yang, Shanlin, 2011. "An attribute weight based feedback model for multiple attributive group decision analysis problems with group consensus requirements in evidential reasoning context," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(1), pages 179-189, July.
- Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F. & Chiclana, F. & Luque, M., 2004. "Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 98-109, April.
- Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Feng, Bo, 2010. "The OWA-based consensus operator under linguistic representation models using position indexes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 203(2), pages 455-463, June.
- Fu, Chao & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2010. "The group consensus based evidential reasoning approach for multiple attributive group decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(3), pages 601-608, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:223:y:2012:i:1:p:167-176. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.