IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/operea/v19y2019i3d10.1007_s12351-017-0307-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On extension of multiplicative consistency to interval fuzzy preference relations

Author

Listed:
  • Jana Krejčí

    (University of Trento
    University of Bayreuth)

Abstract

Various definitions of consistency for interval fuzzy preference relations have been proposed in the literature. The aim of this paper is to review the definitions of multiplicative consistency based on the extension of Tanino’s multiplicative-transitivity property and to point out their drawbacks. In particular, some of the definitions proposed in the literature are not invariant under permutation of objects in interval fuzzy preference relations and some of them violate reciprocity of the pairwise comparisons of objects, which is not acceptable. The weak form of multiplicative-consistency defined by Xu and Chen (Eur J Oper Res 184:266–280, 2008) is approved as the only one appropriate among all definitions examined in the paper. Further, a new definition of multiplicative consistency that is much stronger than the definition proposed by Xu and Chen (Eur J Oper Res 184:266–280, 2008) is introduced. Tools for verifying both the multiplicative consistency defined in this paper and the multiplicative weak consistency defined by Xu and Chen (Eur J Oper Res 184:266–280, 2008) are proposed, and some interesting properties of both multiplicatively consistent and multiplicatively weakly consistent interval fuzzy preference relations are demonstrated. Finally, numerical examples are provided in order to illustrate and compare both types of consistency.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana Krejčí, 2019. "On extension of multiplicative consistency to interval fuzzy preference relations," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 783-815, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:operea:v:19:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s12351-017-0307-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s12351-017-0307-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12351-017-0307-8
    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/s12351-017-0307-8?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. Matteo Brunelli & Michele Fedrizzi, 2015. "Axiomatic properties of inconsistency indices for pairwise comparisons," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 66(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Meimei Xia & Zeshui Xu, 2011. "Some Issues On Multiplicative Consistency Of Interval Reciprocal Relations," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(06), pages 1043-1065.
    3. Xu, Zeshui & Chen, Jian, 2008. "Some models for deriving the priority weights from interval fuzzy preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 266-280, January.
    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. Liu Fang & Peng Yanan & Zhang Weiguo & Pedrycz Witold, 2017. "On Consistency in AHP and Fuzzy AHP," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 128-147, April.
    2. Meng, Fanyong & Tan, Chunqiao & Chen, Xiaohong, 2017. "Multiplicative consistency analysis for interval fuzzy preference relations: A comparative study," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 17-38.
    3. Zeshui Xu & Xiaoqiang Cai, 2013. "On Consensus of Group Decision Making with Interval Utility Values and Interval Preference Orderings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 997-1019, November.
    4. Li, Kevin W. & Wang, Zhou-Jing & Tong, Xiayu, 2016. "Acceptability analysis and priority weight elicitation for interval multiplicative comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 628-638.
    5. Wang, Zhou-Jing & Li, Kevin W., 2015. "A multi-step goal programming approach for group decision making with incomplete interval additive reciprocal comparison matrices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 890-900.
    6. Liang, Fuqi & Brunelli, Matteo & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Consistency issues in the best worst method: Measurements and thresholds," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    7. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    8. Lundy, Michele & Siraj, Sajid & Greco, Salvatore, 2017. "The mathematical equivalence of the “spanning tree” and row geometric mean preference vectors and its implications for preference analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(1), pages 197-208.
    9. Matteo Brunelli & Michele Fedrizzi, 2019. "A general formulation for some inconsistency indices of pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 155-169, March.
    10. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2015. "Generalized analytic network process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 244(1), pages 277-288.
    11. Yibin Zhang & Kevin W. Li & Zhou-Jing Wang, 2017. "Prioritization and Aggregation of Intuitionistic Preference Relations: A Multiplicative-Transitivity-Based Transformation from Intuitionistic Judgment Data to Priority Weights," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 409-436, March.
    12. Faramondi, Luca & Oliva, Gabriele & Setola, Roberto & Bozóki, Sándor, 2023. "Robustness to rank reversal in pairwise comparison matrices based on uncertainty bounds," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 304(2), pages 676-688.
    13. Liu, Fang & Zhang, Wei-Guo & Zhang, Li-Hua, 2014. "Consistency analysis of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 718-726.
    14. Jiří Mazurek, 2018. "Some notes on the properties of inconsistency indices in pairwise comparisons," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 28(1), pages 27-42.
    15. Jaroslav Ramík, 2018. "Strong reciprocity and strong consistency in pairwise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 337-355, September.
    16. Liu, Bingsheng & Shen, Yinghua & Zhang, Wei & Chen, Xiaohong & Wang, Xueqing, 2015. "An interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy principal component analysis model-based method for complex multi-attribute large-group decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(1), pages 209-225.
    17. Jinpei Liu & Zijie Qiang & Peng Wu & Pengcheng Du, 2023. "Multiple stage optimization driven group decision making method with interval linguistic fuzzy preference relations based on ordinal consistency and DEA cross-efficiency," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 309-336, June.
    18. Xiaodong Yu & Atiq ur Rehman & Samina Ashraf & Muhammad Hussain & Shahzad Faizi, 2023. "Multiperson Decision-Making Using Consistent Interval-Valued Fuzzy Information with Application in Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    19. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Alberto Turón, 2020. "The Triads Geometric Consistency Index in AHP-Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-17, June.
    20. Huayou Chen & Ligang Zhou, 2012. "A Relative Entropy Approach to Group Decision Making with Interval Reciprocal Relations Based on COWA Operator," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 585-599, July.

    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:operea:v:19:y:2019:i:3:d:10.1007_s12351-017-0307-8. 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.