IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v312y2022i1d10.1007_s10479-021-04249-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multiple criteria decision making with reliability of assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Chao Fu

    (Hefei University of Technology
    Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Decision-Making and Information System Technologies)

  • Min Xue

    (Hefei University of Technology
    Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Decision-Making and Information System Technologies)

  • Wenjun Chang

    (Hefei University of Technology
    Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education Engineering Research Center for Intelligent Decision-Making and Information System Technologies)

Abstract

The weight and reliability of an individual assessment are two important concepts considered in the evidential reasoning (ER) approach. Through analyzing the existing studies on the combination of individual assessments with both their weights and reliabilities considered in the ER context, their deficiencies are identified in accordance with two principles. One principle is developed in the situation where a specific individual assessment is fully unreliable and the other is developed in the situation where all individual assessments are fully reliable. To address the deficiencies, this paper proposes a new method. In the method, a combination process that takes into account both the weights and reliabilities of individual assessments simultaneously is developed to generate the overall assessment. It is theoretically proven that the combination process satisfies the two principles. Three ways are designed to help a decision maker to flexibly provide individual assessments and determine their reliabilities. A strategic project evaluation problem for an enterprise located in Changzhou, Jiangsu, China is analyzed using the proposed method as a case study to demonstrate its validity and applicability. These are highlighted by its comparison with two existing methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Chao Fu & Min Xue & Wenjun Chang, 2022. "Multiple criteria decision making with reliability of assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 312(1), pages 121-157, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:312:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-021-04249-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-021-04249-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10479-021-04249-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-021-04249-z?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. Lianmeng Jiao & Quan Pan & Yan Liang & Xiaoxue Feng & Feng Yang, 2016. "Combining sources of evidence with reliability and importance for decision making," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 87-106, March.
    2. Amelia Bilbao-Terol & Mar Arenas-Parra & Verónica Cañal-Fernández & Celia Bilbao-Terol, 2016. "Multi-criteria decision making for choosing socially responsible investment within a behavioral portfolio theory framework: a new way of investing into a crisis environment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 247(2), pages 549-580, December.
    3. Salvatore Corrente & Salvatore Greco & Roman Słowiński, 2017. "Handling imprecise evaluations in multiple criteria decision aiding and robust ordinal regression by n-point intervals," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 127-157, June.
    4. John Butler & Douglas J. Morrice & Peter W. Mullarkey, 2001. "A Multiple Attribute Utility Theory Approach to Ranking and Selection," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(6), pages 800-816, June.
    5. Adil Baykasoğlu & İlker Gölcük & Derya Eren Akyol, 2017. "A fuzzy multiple-attribute decision making model to evaluate new product pricing strategies," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 251(1), pages 205-242, April.
    6. M. Socorro García-Cascales & M. Teresa Lamata & J. Miguel Sánchez-Lozano, 2012. "Evaluation of photovoltaic cells in a multi-criteria decision making process," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 199(1), pages 373-391, October.
    7. Dong-Ling Xu, 2012. "An introduction and survey of the evidential reasoning approach for multiple criteria decision analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 163-187, May.
    8. Butler, John & Jia, Jianmin & Dyer, James, 1997. "Simulation techniques for the sensitivity analysis of multi-criteria decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(3), pages 531-546, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Chao Fu & Dong-Ling Xu, 2016. "Determining attribute weights to improve solution reliability and its application to selecting leading industries," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 401-426, October.
    11. Guilan Kong & Lili Jiang & Xiaofeng Yin & Tianbing Wang & Dong-Ling Xu & Jian-Bo Yang & Yonghua Hu, 2018. "Combining principal component analysis and the evidential reasoning approach for healthcare quality assessment," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 271(2), pages 679-699, December.
    12. Chao Fu & Dong-Ling Xu & Shan-Lin Yang, 2016. "Distributed preference relations for multiple attribute decision analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(3), pages 457-473, March.
    13. Liao, Huchang & Wu, Xingli & Mi, Xiaomei & Herrera, Francisco, 2020. "An integrated method for cognitive complex multiple experts multiple criteria decision making based on ELECTRE III with weighted Borda rule," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    14. Thierry Denœux & Marie-Hélène Masson, 2012. "Evidential reasoning in large partially ordered sets," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 135-161, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chao Fu & Weiyong Liu & Wenjun Chang, 2020. "Data-driven multiple criteria decision making for diagnosis of thyroid cancer," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 293(2), pages 833-862, October.
    2. Tim Chen & Hendri Daleanu & Chi-Huey Wong* & J.C.-Y. Chen, 2019. "Mathematical Derives of Evolutionary Algorithms for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Sumerianz Journal of Scientific Research, Sumerianz Publication, vol. 2(1), pages 5-11, 01-2019.
    3. Chao Fu & Dong-Ling Xu, 2016. "Determining attribute weights to improve solution reliability and its application to selecting leading industries," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 401-426, October.
    4. Xiaojiao Qiao & Dan Shi, 2019. "Risk Analysis of Emergency Based on Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2019, pages 1-10, November.
    5. Xinyang Deng & Yong Deng & Felix Chan, 2014. "An improved operator of combination with adapted conflict," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 223(1), pages 451-459, December.
    6. Min Xue & Chao Fu & Shanlin Yang, 2022. "A comparative analysis of probabilistic linguistic preference relations and distributed preference relations for decision making," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 71-97, March.
    7. John C. Butler & James S. Dyer & Jianmin Jia, 2006. "Using Attributes to Predict Objectives in Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 100-116, June.
    8. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2012. "Modeling uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(1), pages 1-14.
    9. Butler, John C. & Dyer, James S. & Jia, Jianmin & Tomak, Kerem, 2008. "Enabling e-transactions with multi-attribute preference models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 748-765, April.
    10. Hua Zhu & Jianbin Zhao & Yang Xu & Limin Du, 2016. "Interval-Valued Belief Rule Inference Methodology Based on Evidential Reasoning-IRIMER," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1345-1366, November.
    11. Fu, Chao & Yang, Jian-Bo & Yang, Shan-Lin, 2015. "A group evidential reasoning approach based on expert reliability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(3), pages 886-893.
    12. Shahryar Monghasemi & Mohammad Reza Nikoo & Mohammad Ali Khaksar Fasaee & Jan Adamowski, 2017. "A Hybrid of Genetic Algorithm and Evidential Reasoning for Optimal Design of Project Scheduling: A Systematic Negotiation Framework for Multiple Decision-Makers," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 389-420, March.
    13. Lianmeng Jiao & Quan Pan & Yan Liang & Xiaoxue Feng & Feng Yang, 2016. "Combining sources of evidence with reliability and importance for decision making," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 24(1), pages 87-106, March.
    14. Ran Fang & Huchang Liao, 2021. "Emergency material reserve location selection by a time-series-based evidential reasoning approach under bounded rationality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1397-1417, August.
    15. Abbas, Ali E. & Hupman, Andrea C., 2023. "Scale dependence in weight and rate multicriteria decision methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(1), pages 225-235.
    16. Vijayta Fulzele & Ravi Shankar, 2023. "Performance measurement of sustainable freight transportation: a consensus model and FERA approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 324(1), pages 501-542, May.
    17. Cohen, Sandra & Doumpos, Michael & Neofytou, Evi & Zopounidis, Constantin, 2012. "Assessing financial distress where bankruptcy is not an option: An alternative approach for local municipalities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 270-279.
    18. Suradej Duangpummet & Jessada Karnjana & Waree Kongprawechnon, 2021. "State-of-charge estimation based on theory of evidence and interval analysis with differential evolution optimization," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 300(2), pages 399-414, May.
    19. Doumpos, M. & Marinakis, Y. & Marinaki, M. & Zopounidis, C., 2009. "An evolutionary approach to construction of outranking models for multicriteria classification: The case of the ELECTRE TRI method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 496-505, December.
    20. Majchrzak Joanna & Goliński Marek & Mantura Władysław, 2020. "The concept of the qualitology and grey system theory application in marketing information quality cognition and assessment," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(2), pages 817-840, June.

    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:spr:annopr:v:312:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10479-021-04249-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.