nach oben

Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making

Erschienen in:

23.11.2016

Aggregation and consensus for preference relations based on fuzzy partial orders

verfasst von: Gleb Beliakov, Simon James, Tim Wilkin

Erschienen in: Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making | Ausgabe 4/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

We propose a framework for eliciting and aggregating pairwise preference relations based on the assumption of an underlying fuzzy partial order. We also propose some linear programming optimization methods for ensuring consistency either as part of the aggregation phase or as a pre- or post-processing task. We contend that this framework of pairwise-preference relations, based on the Kemeny distance, can be less sensitive to extreme or biased opinions and is also less complex to elicit from experts. We provide some examples and outline their relevant properties and associated concepts.

Vorheriger Artikel Editorial message

Nächster Artikel Group decision-making based on heterogeneous preference relations with self-confidence

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

The limits on humans’ ability to accurately assess such information with high granularity has been well documented for decades, e.g. with 7–9 levels seen as the ideal for Likert scales.

In Freson et al. (2010), different transitivity models have been described in terms of the cycle-transitivity framework proposed in Baets and Meyer (2005), Baets et al. (2006). In particular, it is argued that the oft-adopted additive consistency property \(p_{ik} = p_{ij}+p_{jk}-0.5\) should not correctly be referred to as a type of transitivity. In fact, the majority of transitivity conditions are more to do with consistency regarding strength of comparison between transitive 3-tuples. Where possible we will try to distinguish between transitivity of the underlying partial order and such consistency conditions.

We could consider data built from ratios, e.g. from numerical evaluations \(x_i,x_j\) we use the transformation \(p_{ij} = \max (0,\min (1,\log _{1.2} (x_i/x_j)))\) so that if the score for \(x_i\) is 20% higher than \(x_j\) then we have crisp preference. In this case, the transitivity condition still requires Eq. (9) to hold.

Atanassov, K. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 80, 87–96.CrossRefMATH

Barrenechea, E., Fernandez, J., Pagola, M., Chiclana, F., & Bustince, H. (2014). Construction of interval-valued fuzzy preference relations from ignorance functions and fuzzy preference relations. Application to decision making. Knowledge-Based Systems, 58, 33–44.CrossRef

Beliakov, G., Bustince, H., & Calvo, T. (2015). A practical guide to averaging functions. Berlin: Springer.

Beliakov, G., & James, S. (2015). Unifying approaches to consensus across different preference representations. Applied Soft Computing, 35, 888–897.

Beliakov, G., James, S., & Wilkin, T. (2015). Construction and aggregation of preference relations based on fuzzy partial orders. In Proceeddings of FUZZIEEE, Istanbul, Turkey.

Bosch, R. (2006). Characterizations of voting rules and consensus measures. Ph.D. Thesis. Universiteit van Tilburg.

Bustince, H., Beliakov, G., Pradera, G., Dimuro, B. B., & Mesiar, R. (2016). On the definition of penalty functions in aggregations. Fuzzy Sets and Systems. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2016.09.011.

Calvo, T., & Beliakov, G. (2010). Aggregation functions based on penalties. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 161, 1420–1436.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Calvo, T., Mesiar, R., & Yager, R. R. (2004). Quantitative weights and aggregation. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 12(1), 62–69.CrossRef

Chiclana, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., Alonso, S., & Herrera, F. (2009). Cardinal consistency of reciprocal preference relations: A characterization of multiplicative transitivity. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 17(1), 14–23.CrossRef

De Baets, B., & De Meyer, H. (2005). Transitivity frameworks for reciprocal relations: Cycle-transitivity versus FG-transitivity. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 152, 249–270.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

De Baets, B., De Meyer, H., De Schuymer, B., & Jenei, S. (2006). Cyclic evaluation of transitivity of reciprocal relations. Social Choice and Welfare, 26, 217–238.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Fodor, J., & Roubens, M. (1994). Fuzzy preference modelling and multicriteria decision support. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefMATH

Freson, S., De Meyer, H., De Baets, B. (2010). An algorithm for generating consistent and transitive approximations of reciprocal preference relations. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on information processing and management of uncertainty (IPMU 2010) (pp. 564–573). Dortmund, Germany.

García-Lapresta, J., & Llamazares, B. (2010). Preference intensities and majority decisions based on difference of support between alternatives. Group Decision and Negotiation, 19, 527–542.CrossRef

García-Lapresta, J. L., Pérez-Román, D. (2010). Consensus measures generated by weighted Kemeny distances on weak orders. In Proceedings of ISDA (pp. 463–468). Cairo, Egypt.

Grabisch, M., Marichal, J. L., Mesiar, R., & Pap, E. (2009). Aggregation functions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefMATH

Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., & Chiclana, F. (2002). A consensus model for multiperson decision making with different preference structures. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 32, 394–402.CrossRefMATH

Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F., Chiclana, F., & Luque, M. (2004). Some issues on consistency of fuzzy preference relation. European Journal of Operational Research, 154(1), 98–109.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Llamazares, B., Pérez-Asurmendi, P., & García-Lapresta, J. (2013). Collective transitivity in majorities based on difference in support. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 216, 3–15.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Pérez, I. J., Cabrerizo, F. J., Alonso, S., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2014). A new consensus model for group decision making problems with non-homogeneous experts. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 44(4), 494–498.CrossRef

Tanino, T. (1984). Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 12, 117–131.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Tanino, T. (1990). On group decision making under fuzzy preferences. In J. Kacprzyk & M. Fedrizzi (Eds.), Multiperson decision making using fuzzy sets and possibility theory (pp. 172–185). Norwell, MA: Kluwer.

Wu, J., & Chiclana, F. (2014). Multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic reciprocal preference relations and its application to missing values estimation and consensus building. Knowledge-Based Systems, 71, 187–200.CrossRef

Yager, R. (1988). On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 18, 183–190.CrossRefMATHMathSciNet

Titel: Aggregation and consensus for preference relations based on fuzzy partial orders
verfasst von: Gleb Beliakov
Simon James
Tim Wilkin
Publikationsdatum: 23.11.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making / Ausgabe 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1568-4539
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2908
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10700-016-9258-4

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2017

Linguistic fuzzy consensus model for collaborative development of fuzzy cognitive maps: a case study in software development risks

Multi-attribute decision making based on a novel IF point operator

Editorial message

Group decision-making based on heterogeneous preference relations with self-confidence

Consensus building with a group of decision makers under the hesitant probabilistic fuzzy environment

A consensus reaching process in the context of non-uniform ordered qualitative scales

Premium Partner